Antelope Valley StudyThe Big Picture

Sponsored by

Antelope Valley Advisory CommitteeJoint Antelope Valley Authority

City of LincolnUniversity of Nebraska–Lincoln

Lower Platte South Natural Resources District

Imagine a beautifully landscaped water-way flowing along the east edge of downtown,with outdoor cafes, shops and a small, week-end band playing in the new linear park.Commuter and recreational bicyclists pedalalong the waterway’s attractive banks as partof a new downtown/university bike trail.

Over 800 homes and 200 businesses arenow safe from the Antelope Creek designated100-year flood event. Neighborhoods inMalone, Clinton and North Bottoms expe-rience less drive through traffic.

Two blocks away, cars travel on a newlandscaped boulevard along the east edge of the downtown/university area and then

pass over the railroad tracks near the BobDevaney Center that used to block Lincolntraffic five out of 24 hours every day. The ninemiles of new roadways provide newer andfaster ways to travel from the historical citycenter to northern and northeastern Lincoln.

The City of Lincoln, University ofNebraska-Lincoln (UNL), and the LowerPlatte South Natural Resources District(LPSNRD) have engaged consultants, econo-mists, planners, engineers and facilitators toconsciously ask the community, “What do youwant Lincoln, and particularly the 600 square-block historical core to look like in twentyyears?” The result is the “Amended DraftSingle Package.” For four years, communitymembers and representatives from the threegoverning entities have met in over 1,000meetings to compose the Amended DraftSingle Package.

“Many cities larger than Lincoln havefailed to ask their constituents that importantquestion,” said Mayor Don Wesely. “Theresult in most instances has been a flight bymany more affluent people to the suburbanedge. With less economic reinvestment, blightand decay move into the center core with the

results being higher crime, gangs, and otherbig city problems. In addition, these largercity governments have had to spend valuabletax dollars on additional roads, water, sewerand other governmental services for citizensthat fled to the outer edges.”

Antelope Valley is all about asking thecommunity whether Lincoln should followthe well traveled path experienced by mostgrowing and bigger cities—a path full ofblight in the core, fiscal problems and result-ing despair and lack of hope for many of itscitizens—or do we want to grow and keep abetter balance between a healthy, safe andprosperous core and a vibrant and expandingcommunity edge.

If the community agrees with this bold15 to 20 year vision, the administrations ofthe three Antelope Valley partners are pro-posing the first set of strategies be built andimplemented over the next six to 10 years.These first 10 strategies are referred to as the“Phase 1 Projects”—ranging from a newattractive waterway and two new major roadways to new and rehabilitated housing,commercial, recreational and neighborhoodrevitalization opportunities.

The Phase 1 Projects incorporate overtwo-thirds of the Amended Draft SinglePackage and come with a $175 million dollar(1999 dollars) price tag. Major funding isexpected to be shared by t Federal and StateGovernments, from special grants or entitle-ment accounts, with the balance funded by aseries of fourteen other potential sources,including the three governmental partners,Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway,Railroad Safety Transportation District, andprivate investors, corporations and founda-tions. Last year, as “place holder plans,” Cityofficials incorporated most of the City’s shareof the Phase 1 Project in the City’s one to sixyear Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Otherpriority City projects are also funded in theCIP. City officials do not project any signifi-cant property tax increases because of thePhase 1 Projects.

“One of the primary benefits of severalgovernments coordinating and carrying out aninterrelated set of projects over a multi-yeartime frame is that each Partner contributes arelatively small portion of the overall Phase 1Project investment of funds,” said UNLChancellor James Moeser.” In return, eachPartner and its constituents receives a rela-tively high total return in public benefits.”

“If we are successful at implementingthese sets of strategies,” added Moeser, “it willposition the University of Nebraska-Lincolnwell for decades to come. We have the oppor-tunity to free 50-acres of the downtown cam-pus from the serious threat of flooding andimprove traffic flow in and around the cam-pus. As a result the surrounding residentialand business neighborhoods will be enhancedand strengthened,” added the Chancellor.“That will set the stage to continue andimprove all aspects of the University andattract the next generation of fine studentsand faculty who want to learn, live, researchand teach in a high quality and dynamic educational community.”

The final Phase 1 Project funding andimplementation decisions are subject to the

approval of the Lincoln City Council,University of Nebraska Board of Regents andthe Lower Platte South Natural ResourcesDistrict Board, as well as a variety of otherfederal, state and local agencies and entities.The most optimistic timetable for the first setof governmental approvals would be in theFall of 2000, with possible constructionbeginning in 2001 and taking six to 10 yearsto complete.

While the time frame is aggressive and thePhase 1 Project, costs are large, the potentialbenefits are even greater and lead the threepartnering administrations to recommend thatthe community go forward with the Phase 1Projects approvals and implementation.

Approximately 1,300 homes, businesses,churches, and educational facilities are threat-ened in the designated 100-year floodplain ofAntelope Creek. “Working together as a part-nership, we can construct an attractive andaffordable waterway that not only removesthe serious flooding threat to lives and prop-erty but encourages private sector reinvest-ment, expands the tax base and generates newpublic recreational and trail opportunities inand around downtown and the Universitycampus,” stated Glenn Johnson, LPSNRDGeneral Manager.

“Under the Antelope Valley Plan, thecommunity consensus process told us thatgovernment must be more responsive, domore and yet be fiscally prudent with localtax dollars. We believe this proposed set ofprojects is responsive to the four-year com-munity consensus process,” said Johnson.“The community consensus process and theAntelope Valley Study have been guided by acitizen advisory committee that now numbersover 60. This broad representative advisorybody of neighbors, businesses, nonprofit andgovernmental officials, has met 51 times fortwo hours over a four-year period. The community is indebted to the AdvisoryCommittee’s dedication and commitment to address and solve many, many complexand sticky issues and be able to offer a

consolidated and coordinated package thataddresses storm water, transportation andcommunity revitalization.”

While various large and small communitygroups have met over 1,000 times during afour year period, it is not too late to getinvolved, ask questions and express opinions.“A potential series of projects of this magni-tude raises many questions and concerns,”stated the Mayor. “The three governmentalPartners invite the public to review the DraftEnvironmental Impact Statement, visit thefour scheduled open houses, tour the pro-posed project area, and attend and testify onthe environmental impact at the August 1stand August 2nd Town Hall Meeting andPublic Hearing.”

“The vision is lofty and comes with a sizable cost,” said the Mayor. “Still, the tax-payers’ share is very reasonable consideringthe benefits the community will receive if wedecide to go forward. In comparison, the do-nothing alternative is even more expensive andprovides little benefit, as many bigger citieshave unfortunately discovered.”

“The continuation of Lincoln’s quality of life directly depends upon all its parts,including a center core area, remaininghealthy, safe and vibrant,” said Mayor Wesely.

While the three partners are guardedlyoptimistic about project implementation,there are many important pieces that still need to come together before the proposedprojects can become a “reality.”

“This community has been blessed with a history of growth, while maintaining a high quality of life,” said the Mayor. “Wehave seen time and time again that we all‘win’ when this community works togetherin a selfless fashion and not at the expense of a particular group or geographic area. Iam confident this spirit of cooperation andcaring will be reflected as we go forward as acommunity and determine our readiness toimplement the first set of Antelope Valleystrategies as well as carry out other importantcommunity priorities.”

The Big Picture—Antelope Valley Study (Twenty Year Plan & Phase 1 Projects)

“Lincoln can reinvest in the coreof the city and grow at the edges.The continuation of Lincoln’squality of life directly dependsupon all its parts, including

a center core area, remaininghealthy, safe and vibrant,”

said Mayor Wesely.

Antelope Valley Study—The Big Picture July 17, 2000 Page 2

Design charette of proposed performance pavilion east of waterway.

Table of ContentsThe Big Picture Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . .2–3

Public Process/Bottoms Up Approach . . .4–5

Stormwater Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . .6–7

Traffic Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8–9

Amended Draft Single Package . . . . . . .10–11

Community Revitalization . . . . . . . . . . .12–13

Project Costs & Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

Project Milestones & Next Steps . . . . . . . . .15

Kansas City Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

JAVA (Joint Antelope Valley Authority) . . . .17

Draft Environmental Impact Statement .18–19

Highlights of the Phase 1 ProjectsOn December 10, 1999, Lincoln Mayor Don Wesely,

UNL Chancellor James Moeser, and Lower Platte SouthNatural Resources District General Manager Glenn Johnson,announced their collective effort to seek governmentalapprovals of the first phase of proposed projects as outlined by the Amended Draft Single Package. The first set of 10 proposed projects, known as “Phase 1 Projects,” would takeapproximately six to 10 years to construct at a cost of approxi-mately $175 million in today’s dollars. Funding would comefrom a variety of federal, state, and local sources, with no signif-icant tax increase projected. The proposed Phase 1 Projects andbenefits include:

• Construction of a landscaped Antelope Creek water-way from “J” Street to Salt Creek designed to reduce andconfine the designated 100-year flood plain within thechannel banks: Antelope Creek would be restored within aone-half block wide linear park as an open waterway carryingflowing water north. The stream banks would gently rise asgrassy areas and a bike trail from a point near “J” Street andLewis Ball Fields, heading north, then turning northwest andparalleling 21st Street on the east side. The waterway wouldgradually turn westward one block beginning at “R” Street tothe western border of Trago Park, turn due north, and con-tinue to Vine Street where it would flow through the UNLcampus and State Fair Park reconnect with Salt Creek.

• Reduce flood damages and remove up to 1,000structures and up to 50-acres of the UNL City Campusfrom the designated 100-year flood plain: The new con-veyance system would decrease water surface elevations andreduce and confine the designated 100-year flood plain withinthe channel banks which in turn would ease developmentrestrictions on land currently within the designated 100-yearflood plain. The South Street bridge over Antelope Creekwould also be reconstructed and the S. 38th Street bridgewould be removed to reduce significant conveyance constraints that currently contribute to flooding upstream of these bridges.

• Development of a new park and recreation facilities;Expansion of Trago Park: Creation of a new northeast parkand recreation fields (33-acre) west of N. 33rd & HuntingtonAvenue and expansion of Trago Park to “0” Street.

• Creation of a Downtown/UNL bike trail loop con-necting six existing and proposed trails to provide directaccess to Downtown and the UNL City Campus: The pro-posed loop trail would parallel Antelope Creek east of down-town, border the UNL City Campus to the north, proceedsouth through the Haymarket, and turn west at “G” Street.The trail would complete its loop near Lincoln High Schoolwhere it connects with Antelope Creek’s existing trail.

• New North-South roadway: A new four lane North-South Roadway (located in a right-of-way for possible expan-sion to six lanes) would be provided in the 19th Street corridorfrom “K” Street along the east side of the UNL City Campus,curving along the east side of UNL’s Beadle Center, continu-ing north and west to bridge over the Burlington NorthernSanta Fe (BNSF) mainline railway west of the Bob DevaneyCenter, and connecting to 14th Street near Military Road. The North-South Roadway would include an extra wide

landscaped median in Downtown. • New East-West roadway: A new four lane East-West

Roadway would extend from 10th and Avery Streets eastward,first on the south side of the BNSF mainline railway intersect-ing with the North-South Roadway above grade at a signaledintersection. After the North-South Roadway intersection,expanded to six lanes from four lanes, the East-West Roadwaywould bridge over the BNSF Railway and parallel the BNSFmainline tracks on the north side to North 27th Street.

• Elimination of dangerous railroad/street intersec-tions with BNSF mainline: Grade crossings of mainline rail-way tracks that block sidewalks and roadways approximately fivehours a day will be closed at N. 14th Street and N. 17th Street.They will be replaced by a pedestrian underpass and a new four

way road overpass bridge that is part of the new North-SouthRoadway and East-West Roadway.

• Proposed downtown supermarket, potential expan-sion of the downtown area east of 17th Street to the newwaterway: New private sector development opportunities for adowntown supermarket near 19th and “O” Streets, an expan-sion of Market Place (“P” Street) connecting Lincoln’s two his-toric train stations, and other new retailing, office and housingopportunities between 17th Street and the new waterway near22nd Street.

• “Closer to Home” Strategies to improve the coreneighborhoods: Improved housing opportunities and otherresidential and commercial revitalization strategies, areincluded, along with alley rocking and paving, sidewalk andstreet repairs, street lighting, traffic calming, tree removal andreplanting, etc. With the reduction of flood damages, the threatto human life and also the reduction and confinement of thedesignated 100-year flood plain within the channel bank; rein-vestment will increase throughout the core area. Viable homeswould be acquired as part of the waterway and roadway andwould be relocated to fill in vacant lots.

• Expansion of wrap-around community centers:Expand community, neighborhood and health services of exist-ing facilities at locations such as 27th & Holdrege St., ElliottSchool, Clyde T. Malone Community Center and theArmory/Indian Center. Wrap-around centers create efficienciesby having several agencies locate and work together to providecommunity services at a single location.

During the last two years, a preliminary functional designhas been developed for the proposed Phase 1 Projects and theenvironmental documentation prepared.

Antelope Valley Study—The Big Picture July 17, 2000 Page 3

• Reduce flood damages and the threat to human life alongAntelope Creek by constructing two miles of an attractiveopen waterway that will remove over 800 dwelling units,200 businesses and 50-acres of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln City Campus from the current designated 100-yearflood plain.

• Lessen congestion and improved travel times by construct-ing 6 miles of new roadways and 11 new or replacementbridges.

• Increase neighborhood revitalization in the DowntownNeighborhood, Malone, Clinton, Hartley, Woods Park,

North Bottoms, East Campus and University PlaceCommunity Organization by increasing and improvinghousing stock, neighborhood support services, alleys, sidewalks and landscape.

• Strengthen downtown with a new supermarket, new footprint for large and small companies and specialized retail areas.

• Reduce inner city blighting factors.• Encourage citizens to live, work and play in the historical

city center so there are quality alternatives to the city edge, reducing the need to provide costly and duplicativepublic services.

Potential Phase 1 Benefits

Reprinted with permission Lincoln Journal Star/ Kim Stolzer

MemorialStadium

UNLCampus

Q St.

P St.

O St.

N St.

ElliottSchoolWraparound

Vine St.

WhittierJuniorHigh

Y St.

N. 27th St.CommunityCenterWraparound

N. 2

7th

St.

BobDevaneyCenter

16th

St.

17th

St.

TragoPark

Bridges

N

J St.

H St.

Holdrege St.

Downtown/UNLTrail Loop

Q St.

R St.

P Street Market Place

Closer toHome Area

MaloneCenterWraparound

Indian Center/ArmoryWraparound

21st

St.

LincolnHigh

School19

th S

t.

18th

St.

StateCapitol

K St.

L St.

G St.

10th

St.

9th

St.

13th

St.

Burlington North

ern Santa Fe Railway

I-180

Bridge

Railroad

Downtown/UNLTrail Loop

Closer toHome Area

East-WestRoadway

North-SouthRoadway

Military Rd. To 27th St.TrailWest

TrailEest

Antelope Valley Study—The Big Picture July 17, 2000 Page 4

Advisory CommitteeThe Antelope Valley Advisory Committee

was formed in June, 1996 and has met 51times over the four year period. Coleen Seng,Jan Gauger and Keith Parker, as Tri-Chairs,have guided the Committee’s work. TheAdvisory Committee’s initial task was to identify and define the Purposes and Needs of the Antelope Valley Study and sponsoredthe first Town Hall Meeting (September,1996). Following these steps, the AdvisoryCommittee helped develop, screen and refineoptions to solve the Study’s Purposes andNeeds. They also reviewed staff generated

materials as draft documents and findingsbecame available, guided the evolution anddevelopment of the Draft Single Package atthe second Town Hall Meeting (November1997) and later refined the Amended DraftSingle Package.

The Advisory Committee is a unique mix of dedicated and interested neighborhoodcitizens, nonprofit organizations, businessesand government officials. The AdvisoryCommittee initially consisted of approximately20 members and has gradually increased toover 60 members as interest in the Study hasgrown. The three Partners are truly apprecia-tive of the amount of time and commitmentthese citizens have made to help lead the plan-ning process.

Work Plan Review Committee

Even before the Advisory Committee wasformed, a working committee first outlined thepublic involvement process for use by the threePartners. Known as the Work Plan ReviewCommittee, this committee also developed“fair play rules” that have been used through-out the process to help provide citizen inclusive-ness, fairness, and consensus decision-making.

Workshops & Many, Many MeetingsAt key times, the Advisory Committee

sponsored workshops and formed workingsubcommittees on a variety of topics andissues: health and human services, trails andopen space, youth recreation, and housing.The eleven key neighborhoods held specialworkshops to refine neighborhood issues anddevelop the “closer to home” strategies thatare now part of the Phase 1 Projects.

Over the four-year period, over 1,000meetings have been held to receive publicinput from neighborhood organizations, citywide business groups, fraternal organizations

and special interests. Throughout the process,the Advisory Committee also has sponsoredmeetings with the potentially impacted resi-dences and business owners and tenants togive them the opportunity to be fully advisedand help revise the proposed plans.

Design CharettesMany of the key design features of the

waterway, roadway and abutting proposedland uses were developed with the communityin two public design charettes lead byUniversity of Nebraska Architecture Professor,Tom Laging. These visual concepts have

helped shape the exciting potential of thecommunity revitalization programs and havebeen incorporated into the preliminary func-tional design plans of the Phase 1 Projects.

Newsletters, Video, Radio Interviews

Six newsletters have been published during the Antelope Valley Study and mailedto a general mailing list of over 3,000 citizens,including residents, property owners, busi-nesses, and community leaders. There havebeen press releases at key study milestones tokeep the public advised and informed. Videoshave been produced and broadcast on localaccess cable networks to further disseminateinformation. Over 20 briefings with the mediahave been held, including radio interview andhosted call in shows.

Governmental ReviewApproximately, thirty-five special brief-

ings have been held with elected officials.Super Commons meetings of the Mayor, CityCouncil, County Board, and PlanningCommission have been held at key study mile-stones. In turn, the key Study phases havebeen adopted and incorporated into theComprehensive Plan by the elected officials.

Several public hearings related to theAntelope Valley Study have been conducted.These include hearings in front of the LincolnCity Council, Lancaster County Board andthe Lincoln-Lancaster County PlanningCommission. Most recently, these bodies heldpublic hearings and approved an amendmentto the Comprehensive Plan to include theAmended Draft Single Package.

Upcoming Public InputOpportunities

Public input and review is not over.Preliminary plans and agreements have beenoutlined by the three Partners and Antelope

Valley 60-plus community member AdvisoryCommittee on many aspects of the proposedPhase I Projects. Still, many, many more pub-lic participation steps have to be completedbefore the Antelope Valley vision can becomea reality and construction begins.

Now that the federal government hasreleased the Draft Environmental ImpactStudy and the Draft Feasibility Report andDraft Environmental Assessment, public com-ments and testimony are being sought untilAugust 15, 2000 (45-day comment period).As part of the federal document reviewprocess, the Draft Environmental ImpactStatement, the Assessment of Effects andDraft Feasibility Report and DraftEnvironmental Assessment will be linked andavailable on the City of Lincoln’s web page(www\ci.lincoln.ne.us\city\pworks\indec.htm).A new series of Channel 5 public access tele-vision shows will be airing in the month ofJuly. Public open houses will be held 7–8:30PM on July 24th 25th, 26th and 27th. OnSaturday, July 29th, from 9–11 AM, the pub-lic can experience and tour the area involvingthe Phase 1 Projects. Guided bus tours willleave Lincoln High School north parking lotevery 30 minutes.

These activities will lead to a third TownHall meeting on August 1st and 2nd, atLincoln High School, from 4:00 PM to 9:00PM. This Town Hall will provide additionalpublic information, discussions and formalpublic hearings to receive public comments onthe Draft Environmental Impact Statementand the Draft Feasibility Report and DraftEnvironmental Assessment The AdvisoryCommittee and the Joiny Antelope ValleyAuthority (JAVA) will sponsor the third Town Hall Meeting. The key components of theAntelope Valley Study and the Phase 1 Projectswill be displayed and explained by AdvisoryCommittee, Management Committee andStudy Team members. In addition, on thesame dates and time, the public can give com-ments and testimony in front of hearing offi-cers regarding the Draft Environmental ImpactStatement, the Assessment of Effects, and theDraft Feasibility Report and DraftEnvironmental Assessment.

The formal Phase 1 Project approval isexpected to begin in early Fall. Project fund-ing and implementation strategies will be subject to the approval of the Lincoln CityCouncil, University of Nebraska Board ofRegents and the Lower Platte South NaturalResources District Board, as well as a varietyof other federal, state and local agencies andentities. The major governmental approvalsinclude the following: (i) Antelope Valleyreflected in Comprehensive Plan Amendment;(ii) Environmental Impact Statement (iii) U.S.Army Corps of Engineers Antelope CreekFeasibility Study; (iv) Phase 1 Projects fundingand (v) approval of the ImplementationPeriod of the JAVA Interlocal Agreement bythe Partners. The optimistic timetable for thecompletion of this first set of governmentalapprovals is December, 2000.

Public Consensus Process: Based Upon A “Bottom-Up” Approach

Design charette concept of proposed Antelope Creek and Trago Park art wall.

Purposesand Needs...

At the first Antelope Valley TownHall Meeting in September 1996,approximately 200 interested citizensestablished the top eight major Purposesand Needs of the Antelope Valley Study.These eight were again discussed andreaffirmed at Town Hall 2 after the startof the National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA) process:

1Neighborhood Vitality: The healthand spirit of neighborhoods depends,in part, on availability of good housing, jobs, education, shopping,transportation, personal safety, andmedical services.

2Stormwater Management: A 100-year flood event (a 1% chance of occur-ring annually) in Antelope Creek couldcause extensive property, building, con-tents and infrastructure damages. Localfloodplain management regulationsstop many development opportunitiesor cause additional costs.

3Downtown Area Vitality:Downtown businesses need a com-petitive reason not to leave the down-town area for new development areasat the City’s edges.

4Traffic Operations: Continued traf-fic growth is expected in Lincoln,increasing traveler delays and increas-ing the potential for safety conflicts.In addition, missing connections inthe street system and lack of alterna-tives cause “through” drivers to useneighborhood streets.

5Land Use Patterns: Different neigh-borhoods and land uses have some-times grown in unplanned ways,potentially causing some land tobe underutilized and other uses of

land to be in direct conflict with one another.

6Trail Continuity: Actively used bicycle and hiking trails approachDowntown but are not connected toform a coordinated trail network.

7Recreation: Recreation facilities,parks and open space in the older cityneighborhoods are in short supply forall ages, but particularly for youth.

8Health and Human Services: Goodhealth is directly related to access togood food, housing, transportation,and a clean and healthy environment aswell as to affordable and accessiblehealth care and human service facilities.

From the very beginning the AntelopeValley Study has been billed as Lincoln’s mostambitious public works and redevelopmentplan ever. Planners talk of a raised main inter-section near the Devaney Center; a green,landscaped, flood-controlling waterway wherethere wasn’t any green before, much lesscreek water. A parallel bike trail would bustlewith hikers and bikers. The three Partnershave spent the last decade studying thedetails, making changes, and re-studying during meeting after meeting after meeting.Now, as the Antelope Valley Study is closer to becoming a reality, a few of Lincoln’sneighborhood leaders are beginning to realizethat this most ambitious plan has becomeLincoln’s best-ever mechanism for commu-nity revitalization.

Just the prospect of uncovering AntelopeCreek for a mile north of “N” Street, whereit now flows through an underground con-duit, and making it an urban greenway hasthe demand for housing exceeding the supplyin adjacent neighborhoods like Malone andClinton. Some of the demand comes fromanother adjacent neighborhood, theUniversity of Nebraska. Jim Cook of theUniversity Place Community Organizationsaid, “There are a lot of University employeeswho’d like to live closer to work.” He saidAntelope Valley would allow the city’s centralneighborhoods to move away from being abuffer zone of rental property between down-town and neighborhoods where the ownersoccupy a higher percentage of homes.

Cook, Neighborhoods, Inc. ExecutiveDirector Terry Uland, former MaloneNeighborhood Association President, MikeMorosin and Clinton neighborhood residentDelores Lintel, however, all agree the mostwelcome change to result from the AntelopeValley Study process, so far, is the attitude ofthe people who already live in those neigh-borhoods. “Fighting together for or againstvarious components in the Antelope ValleyStudy,” said Morosin, “has made the neigh-borhoods stronger. Most students or otherswho rent housing never seemed to participatein any kind of neighborhood fellowship.” He

said, “Now it’s common to see them in thepark enjoying themselves. They feel safe.”

The transformation and generally posi-tive public attitude toward the AntelopeValley Study is even more remarkable giventhe fact the transformation is probably rootedin something called the Northeast Radialproject. “We just woke up one morning (inthe 1980s),” said Lintel, “and learned theCity had been buying up land in our neigh-borhoods for this roadway. I thought ‘Howdare they?” The ensuing fracas made therecent ballpark controversy look like a sev-enth-inning stretch and when the dust clearedthe Northeast Radial had been thrown out ofthe ballgame. Lintel, by all accounts, was theopposition’s most valuable player.

When a map of the Northeast Radialplan is put beside a map of the AntelopeValley plan it takes several glances to noticeany difference, but Lintel said the biggestdifference is the Antelope Valley plannershave taken, “an absolute opposite approachfrom the Northeast Radial.” Planners havetried hard to use community input. As aresult, proposed new roads in the AntelopeValley plan follow the perimeters of neigh-borhoods instead of bisecting them like theold plan. “Antelope Valley,” according toLintel, “encourages reinvestment and owneroccupancy of housing in the neighborhoods.The process has allowed us to speak-up forstable zoning and density.” Perhaps becauseof the foiled Northeast Radial project, plan-ners have listened.

In its 15 years, Neighborhoods, Inc. hasdeveloped into an agency that offers secondmortgages, loans to first-time homebuyersand financial rehabilitation training in six ofLincoln’s older neighborhoods. Uland likesthe timing of Antelope Valley. He said a lot ofpeople see Lincoln, “as being a large smalltown about to become a large city,” and revi-talizing neighborhoods now will be a lotmore economical than several years from now.Uland also likes the flood control aspects ofthe Study. The uncovered channel wouldcompletely contain a 100-year rainfall event,meaning no repeat of the disastrous flooding

of the 1950s and easier flood insurance terms.“Right now,” said Uland, “when someonebuys a home in those neighborhoods themandatory purchase of flood insurance sacrifices five-to-six-thousand dollars in buying power.” He sees the open channel ascreating a hard line eastern boundary for theUniversity. “I think the University will even-tually divest its (main campus) assets east ofthe creek, allowing a more normal develop-ment of neighborhoods.”

Proposed new roads in the projectwould be a benefit to the entire city, butthere’s another reason, said Cook, the city as a whole should support Antelope Valley.“Lincoln is one city. It has no suburbs and I think that’s its biggest saving buildingblock.” Cook, who grew-up in Lincoln, thenreturned here in 1990 after a hiatus said,“reinvigoration of the core communitieswould bring a balance of growth betweennorth and south,” helping Lincoln to keep a sense of oneness throughout. “If we don’tspend money on revitalization now, we’lllose that sense of one community.” Morosinagreed, saying, “Many of the big city neighborhoods that became famous for their blight in the 1960s, such as the Watts

neighborhood in Los Angeles, are still in asimilar condition today.”

There is still apprehension about lifealong Antelope Creek for some. One of thefirst orders of business should Antelope Valleygraduate from a study to an actual project willbe the buying-out of owners whose land fallsin the path of the channel. Morosin has beenan active member of the Advisory Committeeand a vocal critic of certain aspects of theAntelope Valley Study. He hopes to be one ofthe homeowners to take advantage of theStudy’s proposed program to have the citymove viable houses in the path of the pro-posed waterway or roadway to other loca-tions. “I like the character of my old house.”He is anxious to find out what kind of dealthe City will offer. “It’s time for the City tosit down and lay the cards on the table, and,hopefully, the result will allow people tofinally relax.” The Antelope Valley Projectwould bring closure to an unsettled periodfor core neighborhoods. There’s even a planto have University students re-design porchesfor many neighborhood houses. Porches andneighborhood relaxation, a true partnershipworth building.

Antelope Valley Study—The Big Picture July 17, 2000 Page 5

Historic Value of Antelope Valleyby Ed Zimmer, Historic Preservation Planner, Lincoln Planning Department

To a Lincoln historian, the Antelope Valley Study areaoffers rich and varied treasures, and subtle lessons. Let’s take a“talking tour,” and look for both.

On 19th century views of Lincoln, the Antelope Creekvalley was the east boundary of the urban area. Some of theearliest buildings surviving in the valley reflect urban forms onthe “west bank,” and suburban houses east of the creek. Forexample, the pair of Victorian cottages at 2005 and 2011 “L”Street, built around 1890, are small, close-spaced “city” houses.The Murphy-Sheldon House at 2525 “N” Street, Royer-Williams House at 407 N. 27th Street, and Eddy-Taylor Houseat 435 N. 25th Street are larger houses on larger lots—more“suburban,” if one imagines their original settings.

The study area includes a number of historic churches,and they in turn tell stories of early and modern Lincoln.Tifereth Israel Synagogue at 18th and “M” was built in 1912to house one of Lincoln’s two Jewish congregations. Later thecompact Neo-classical building was the Community Playhouse

and then a factory for church organs. Now the adaptable build-ing is home to 11 apartments. At 26th and “P” Streets the for-mer Second Presbyterian Church of 1902 reflects Lincoln’sevolving demographics, as the church of Lincoln’s VietnameseCatholics. The handsome church was designed by the Lincolnarchitects A. W. Woods and Artemas Roberts, who designedWilliam Jennings Bryan’s Fairview mansion that same year. Theold Vine Congregational Church of 1908 at 25th and “S”Streets was later home to a Mennonite congregation, and since1970 has sheltered Christ Temple Mission, a multi-racial con-gregation founded by Rev. Trago McWilliams.

The McWilliams family is emblematic of the lessonsLincoln can learn through the Antelope Valley Study. Now inits seventh generation in Lincoln, this strong African-Americanfamily has given our city teachers and churchmen, civil rightsleaders and entrepreneurs, since the 1880s. Trago Park at theheart of the Antelope Valley projects bears the name of TragoT. and Trago O. McWilliams, father and son ministers.

Through much of the 20th century, Lincoln’s AfricanAmerican citizens were increasingly segregated into the neigh-borhood now called “Malone,” and a vibrant urban villagegrew up there, materially poor but rich in mutual support. Thischapter of Lincoln’s history is uniquely chronicled by the workof Earl McWilliams, a gifted photographer who recorded thecity’s buildings, workers, and black community between about1910 and 1925. Several hundred of his artistic photographssurvive, and present-day members of the McWilliams family areworking with the Nebraska State Historical Society, the LincolnPlanning Department, and Antelope Valley Study Team todevelop appropriate projects to share these beautiful and evoca-tive images and the history they represent with Lincoln and thenation.

The historic treasures of the Antelope Valley range fromsturdy buildings to fragile glass negatives. All of them can helpus understand where our community began, and can enrich ourfuture if we listen to their lessons.

Neighborhood Leaders Thoughts On Antelope Valley

Neighborhood leaders say the Antelope Valley Study has already made a positive impact. From the left: Jim Cook,University Place Community Organization; Delores Lintel, Clinton neighborhood resident; Terry Uland,Neighborhoods, Inc. and former Malone Neighborhood Association President Mike Morosin

The Army Corps of Engineers recently released theAntelope Creek Draft Feasibility Report and DraftEnvironmental Assessment that concluded a proposed floodcontrol project is economically feasible. The flood control pro-ject recommended for cost sharing provides maximum annualeconomic benefits in excess of annual costs with annual netbenefits of $4,535,000 and a benefit-cost ratio of 1.23.

The important finding that benefits exceed costs meansthe $53 million new Antelope Valley waterway is eligible to becost shared with the Federal Government. Approximately $25million of Federal funding would be provided. It is anticipatedthat State, City and LPSNRD funds will be used for theremaining $28 million of costs. Completion and approval ofthe Corps of Engineers Final Feasibility Report and the Chiefof Engineer’s Report, and Congressional authorization of theflood control project in the Water Resources Development Actof 2000 are expected by the end of the year.

The Feasibility Study determined the estimated annualflood damage is $5.3 million assuming no flood control projectis constructed. This figure considered damages generated byinfrequent, but catastrophic floods as well as those due to morefrequent floods of much smaller magnitude. The severity offlood damage and the likelihood of flooding on an annual basiswere both taken into consideration to determine the estimatedannual damage.

One of the less frequent levels of flooding considered,which is important because of its effect on land use regulations,is the 100-year flood. This is the flood caused by a storm sosevere that it has only a one percent statistical chance of occur-ring annually. More severe floods are considered in the flooddamage analysis, but this one is important because it is the basisof the flood hazard area outline used for land use regulation.The City has stringent requirements controlling and limitingnew construction and redevelopment of existing structures inthe 100-year flood hazard area. These regulations are designedto minimize flood damage to future construction, but do noth-ing to prevent damage to existing buildings and contents.

The proposed AntelopeCreek flood control projectfrom the mouth to “J” Streetwill reduce approximately 80percent of the estimated annualflood damage and will reduceand confine the 100-year floodplain within the channel banks.Unfortunately, no one can con-trol the timing or amount ofrainfall. Consequently, there isalso a statistical chance a100-year storm can occur twicein one year, or twice in fiveyears or twice in 500 years. Thequestion is not if a 100-yearstorm will happen but when.No one knows and the only realprotection is for a communityto implement proper floodplainmanagement controls.

Antelope Creek is a smallstream that starts near 91st andPine Lake Road, flows throughHolmes Lake, meanders in anopen channel underneath manystreet bridges and throughmany residential and businessneighborhood areas until it isforced underground into an enclosed conduit near 23rd & “N”Street, just west of Elliott Elementary School. It then disap-pears from sight and goes underneath several buildings, includ-ing Office Max, until it leaves the enclosed conduit southwestof Cushman near 21st and Vine Streets. The final creek legmeanders in an open channel again underneath many streetbridges, through the eastern edge of the UNL campus, thenunderneath the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway tracks,

and finally travels between North 14thStreet and the west edge of State FairPark, where it empties into Salt Creeksouth of Cornhusker Highway.

Because of increased run-offcaused by urban development in thelower reaches of the Antelope Creekbasin between Holmes Lake Dam andthe conduit, only a four-year or smallerstorm is calculated by the engineers tofit into the conduit and any largerstorm would exceed the conduit andcause the excess water to travel over-land, flooding many East Downtown,University, Malone, Clinton and NorthBottoms neighborhood streets andproperties.

The open stretches of AntelopeCreek also have wide flood plains thatdeter redevelopment opportunities.Various street bridges crossing the opencreek are too small. Lack of adequatewater openings underneath the bridgescause the bridges to act as small dams,flooding properties. The small conduitand inadequate bridges cause theFederal Emergency ManagementAdministration (FEMA) designated100-year floodplain to reach from fourto seven blocks wide in many stretches.Besides the great width of the floodingpath in a 100-year flood, someAntelope Valley areas would be under-neath up to six feet of water at theheight of the flood.

Without Holmes Lake Dam, thedownstream flooding potential would

be much greater. Holmes Lake Dam has been able to captureand hold flood water at the upper end of the watershed butcannot capture rainwater falling in the seven square miles of theAntelope Creek basin lying below the Holmes Lake Dam. Sincethe completion of the Holmes Lake Dam in 1962, this down-stream section has added new dwelling units, businesses, park-ing lots and streets, which have increased the storm run-off andpotential downstream flooding in the historical core area.

The small conduit, small bridge openings and extensivedevelopment have all combined to cause approximately 600acres, 1,300 structures and 1,800 residents to be at risk offlooding and included within the currently designated 100-yearflood plain. Based on the hydrologic and hydraulic analysis prepared by the Corps of Engineers, it was determined thatwidespread damage from flooding is likely to start with theoccurrence of an event with an annual probability of 0.125(eight-year event). In addition to millions of dollars in flooddamage to property, buildings, contents and infrastructure,there is also the potential for injuries and deaths. In 1908, tenlives were lost when a big storm hit the Antelope Valley basin.

For four years the community and the Army Corps ofEngineers has been trying to solve the serious risk and lookingfor the best set of flood plain management solutions. Manystormwater alternatives were identified, priced, measured andscreened in light of other proposed transportation networks,abutting land uses, and redevelopment potentials. Some of theother alternatives explored included:

• Build another dam like Holmes Lake Dam somewhere inthe watershed;

• Install up to seven large underground conduits;• Construct three or four very large detention ponds to

store water in the vicinity of 27th & Randolph Streets andAntelope Creek, and Antelope Park area;

• Lower existing streets and the proposed North-SouthRoadway to carry storm water through the area;

• Build a large overflow detention area on part of theLincoln High campus and the Lewis Ballpark and relocateCapital Parkway on the south and west sides of LincolnHigh School.These and other alternatives were eliminated because they

were too costly, too disruptive to neighborhoods and/or did notadequately protect the impacted areas from a 100-year flood.

The recommended Antelope Valley stormwater solutionproposes keeping the underground conduit in place and buildinga two-mile, grassy, gently sloped open waterway at the low point

Antelope Valley Study—The Big Picture July 17, 2000 Page 6

Reprinted with permission Lincoln Journal Star/Kim Stolzer

Corps of Engineers Draft Feasibility Report Concludes theAntelope Creek Flood Control Project is Economically Feasible

MemorialStadium

UNLCampus

Q St.

P St.

O St.

N St.

ElliottSchool

Vine St.

WhittierJuniorHigh

Y St.

N. 27th St.CommunityCenter

N. 2

7th

St.

BobDevaneyCenter

16th

St.

17th

St.

Bridges

N

J St.

H St.

Holdrege St.

Downtown/UNLTrail Loop

R St.

P Street Market Place

MaloneCenter

Indian Center/Armory

21st

St.

LincolnHigh

School

19th

St.

18th

St.

StateCapitol

K St.

L St.

G St.

10th

St.

9th

St.

13th

St.

Burlington North

ern Santa Fe Railway

I-180

Bridge

Railroad

Downtown/UNLTrail Loop

Closer toHome Area

East-WestRoadway

North-SouthRoadway

Antelope CreekDesignated100-Year

Flood Plain

ExistingUndergroundConduit

TragoPark

Consultants say a proposed flood-control project along Antelope Creek wouldreduce and contain the designated 100-year flood plain within the channelbanks. This would ease economic development restrictions and would reduceflood damage that could cost millions of dollars to property, buildings and con-tents. An open channel at the western edge of the Malone Neighborhood wouldcarry most of the floodwaters.

Entrance to Antelope Creek at 23rd and “N” street. The entrance consists of two box culverts each eight feet highby nine feet wide. The gentleman standing in the opening is six feet tall.

(continued on page 7)

Antelope Valley Study—The Big Picture July 17, 2000 Page 7

Past FloodingEvents

During the 1900s, several major Antelope Creek floodscaused considerable damage to the City of Lincoln. The sourceof this flooding is the inability of Antelope Creek to hold floodwaters during heavy rains. Antelope Creek is a tributary of Salt Creek (which originates in Cheney) and flows northwestthrough the City and into Salt Creek near north 14th Streetand Military Road.

Prior to 1908, there was virtually no concern for floodcontrol. However, as the City grew and houses and businessestook the place of farm fields and prairies, the banks ofAntelope Creek were unable to hold heavy rains. In July of1908, nearly six inches of rain fell in Lincoln leaving hundredsof people homeless, killing at least ten people and causing con-siderable damage to property, crops and roads. Following thisflood, City officials began building a 4,065 foot box under-ground culvert, officially known as the Antelope Creek BoxConduit to replace the open waterway. This conduit took 5 years to complete and in turn, the existing creek was filledin and citizens responded by building homes and businesses in close proximity. The conduit is still there today with waterflowing under businesses, streets and homes from 23rd and“N” Streets to 19th and Vine.

On June 14, 1951, eight inches of rain fell in merely fourhours which clogged the mouth of the culvert and sent waterspilling over the banks. No lives were lost in this flood, butproperty damage was estimated at $475,000, houses werewashed away, basements filled and streets were impassable for hours.

Additional floods prompted President Dwight D.Eisenhower in 1957 to sign a bill authorizing the constructionof a dam at 56th and Van Dorn. Since the completion of theHolmes Lake Dam in 1962, no 100-year floods have occurred;however, some local flooding such as in July, 1967, resultedfrom several heavy rains. On September 8, 1989 Holmes Lakereached a record high elevation when a storm dumped eightinches of rain in the Antelope Creek basin. Engineers esti-mated that damage could have exceeded $15 million without

the dam. Though the Holmes Lake Dam, which is on theupper end of Antelope Creek, has done a good job of prevent-ing floods, it is just a matter of time before a 100-year floodposes a substantial risk to downstream property owners wherethe dam provides no protection.

Since the construction of Holmes Lake, additional in-fillurban development has taken place in the Antelope Creek basinbetween Salt Creek and the Holmes Lake Dam, which hasincreased storm run-off and potential downstream flooding.

In 1993, the conduit was showing considerable wear andtear as a result of time, water and salt, so voters approved a $4 million bond issue in 1993 to repair the 1908 conduit. TheLower Platte South Natural Resources District and City of

Lincoln jointly worked together on the repair of the conduitto strengthen and extend its life. However, these repairs,including a new liner, reduced the capacity by approximately16 percent. Engineers now estimate that the Antelope CreekConduit can only carry up to a four year storm and any largerstorm will have to go over land, flooding parts of Downtown,the University, Woods Park, Malone and Clinton neighbor-hoods and UNL since there is no available open waterway.

According to the Corps of Engineers, a 100-year rainfallcurrently would result in floodwaters three to six-feet deepalong the conduit entrance to exit and would extend approxi-mately five blocks across and would cause millions of dollars inflood damages.

The most upstream ele-ments of the Antelope Valleystorm water improvements wouldeliminate existing bridge restric-tions at 38th Street and at SouthStreet. During intense storms thebridges back up water inAntelope Creek, causing floodingto abutting homes in the SouthStreet and Normal Blvd. vicinity.

Removal of these twobridge restrictions would allowthe water to continue down thecreek corridor in an unimpededcourse. In turn, about 325 struc-tures, including 300 homeswithin the Normal Boulevardand South Street area would befree of the designated 100-yearfloodplain.

To relieve the existing flood hazard, the Phase 1 Projects propose to:

• Reconstruct and lengthen the South Street bridge over Antelope Creek just south of the JimAger Memorial Junior Golf Course.

• Remove the 38th Street bridge and dead-end 38th Street on both sides of Antelope Creek.Constructing a new 38th Street bridge did not appear cost effective given the cost of thebridge, traffic volume on the street and the existence of four alternative access routes within atwo block area.

38th Street Bridge andSouth Street Bridge

Antelope Creek

AntelopePark

Jim AgerJunior

Golf Course

Billy Wolff Trail Normal Blvd.

South Street

New BridgeRemove Existing

Bridge

RelocatedTrail

36th

St.

37th

St.

38th

St. Sc

ott A

ve.

of the Antelope Creek valley. This solution isthe preference of the citizen AdvisoryCommittee and was confirmed at the commu-nity Town Hall 2 Meeting in November, 1997.In turn, the three Partners incorporated the rec-ommendation into the Amended Draft SinglePackage, which was reviewed positively by thePlanning Commission, County Board and CityCouncil in 1998. This is also the stormwaterrecommendation the Army Corps FeasibilityStudy found had merit by concluding that ben-efits exceed costs (which allows the recommen-dation to be eligible for federal cost sharing.)

The Phase 1 Projects incorporate the entire

Antelope Valley stormwaterrecommendation and includes

the following components: • Landscaped Antelope Creek waterway

to carry 100-year flood waters: AntelopeCreek would be restored within a one-halfblock wide linear park as an open waterway car-rying flowing water north. The stream bankswould gently rise as grassy areas and a bike trailfrom a point near “J” Street and Lewis BallFields, heading north, then turning northwestand paralleling 21st Street on the east side. Thewaterway would gradually turn westward oneblock beginning at “R” Street to the westernborder of Trago Park, turn due north, and con-

tinue to Vine Street, to the University and StateFair Park then into Salt Creek.

• Encourage ReinvestmentOpportunities: The new open linear parkwaterway will be aesthetically designed andattractive to encourage nearby recreational,housing and business redevelopment opportu-nities. Narrowing of the four to seven blockwide floodplain will increase the market valueof existing businesses and homes, which willencourage more renovations and maintenanceand in turn help abate blighting conditions.

• Reduction of the designated 100-year flood potential: A total of over 1,100structures and 50 acres of the UNL CityCampus would no longer be threatened bythe possibility of severe Antelope Creek100-year flooding. The new conveyance sys-tem would fully accommodate a 100-yearstorm within its banks, which in turn wouldease development restrictions on land cur-rently within the four to seven block wide des-ignated 100-year floodplain. The South Streetbridge over Antelope Creek would also bereconstructed and the Antelope Creek bridgeat S. 38th Street would be removed to pro-vide additional flood plain protection.

• Maintenance: The use of the existingconduit and the proposed open waterwaydesign will minimize clean up costs after aheavy storm. By combining resources andusing special purpose districts, the City andLower Platte South Natural Resources District believe maintenance costs will notoverburden taxpayers.

Army Corps (continued from page 6)

A different mode of travel was needed to get around at 21st and “K” Street on July 26, 1967. Heavy rain was the single cause of the flooding. Lincoln Journal Star

Antelope Valley Study—The Big Picture July 17, 2000 Page 8

The effort to solve transportation issues in the historiccenter of the community has been a long, bumpy and some-times disrupted trip. The three Partners are hopeful theAntelope Valley transportation routes will now make the tripmore enjoyable and faster.

A Brief Traffic HistoryFor decades the University of Nebraska-Lincoln has tried

to solve the pedestrian and auto situation at 16th and 17thStreets on the Lincoln campus but there has been no solution.Also, the community sought to solve the traffic flow problemsfrom northeast Lincoln and downtown, by designing and

acquiring over 300 properties for the controversial road project,known as the Northeast Radial. In 1981, voters put the brakeson the Northeast Radial Project. The community had to backup as part of the Northeast Radial Reuse Project and dispose ofthe acquired right-of-way and repair the resulting scars throughsome of Lincoln’s oldest and historic neighborhoods.

Meanwhile, the Comprehensive Plan was amended in1997. The Plan adds two major employment centers and several commercial shopping areas along North 27th Street,north of Cornhusker Highway. Travel time on North 27thStreet is already unacceptable for most motorists and yet thesenew proposed land uses continue to add to the 27th Streetcongestion problem.

Lincoln continues to grow and another major employmentcenter and more shopping centers are designated in theComprehensive Plan, along North 84th Street betweenHoldrege Street and Havelock Avenue. More traffic is trying totravel through Northeast Lincoln and trying to cross theBurlington Northern Santa Fe tracks.

When the Antelope Valley Study started in 1996, were anaverage of 50 coal and freight trains per day that diagonally cutacross Lincoln, blocking cars and trucks up to four hours in a24 hour period. Four years later, railroad officials report thereare 70 trains blocking traffic up to five hours a day. Railroadprojections indicate that the train traffic will continue to grow.Police, ambulance and fire officials are increasingly frustratedand have to take slower alternative routes. Other citizens arenow late for work, school, appointments and athletic events atthe Bob Devaney Center.

Traffic—Difficult Puzzle To SolveThe Antelope Valley Study has been trying to solve a

multitude of traffic dilemma issues that to date remained

unsolved. Citizen participation in the Antelope Valley studyreached the consensus that acceptable transportation solutions to the puzzle can no longer include routes thatmaterially harm the core neighborhoods. In fact, publicinput during the Study set a course that required the newAntelope Valley routes be on the edge of residential neigh-borhoods and include community revitalization programs tohelp strengthen the historic core neighborhoods, downtownand the university campus. This difficult assignment hasmeant that the new roadway cannot be built with the solemotivation of moving cars. The benefits of neighborhoodsmust be a key component of planning the new roadway.

Over a hundred potential traffic solutions were analyzedand discussed by the community over the last four years.Eventually, the best of these plans was consolidated into theAntelope Valley Draft Single Package. Further refinements weremade and the revised plan became known as the AmendedDraft Single Package.

A New North-South RoadwayIn Phase 1, the new four lane North-South Roadway

would start at “K” and “L” Streets and be routed along the19th Street corridor on the east side of the UNL City Campus,curving along the east side of UNL’s Beadle Center, continu-ing northwest to bridge over the Burlington Northern Santa Fe(BNSF) mainline railway west of the Bob Devaney Center, andconnecting to 14th Street near Military Road.

The North-South Roadway would be well landscapedand in parts of Downtown initially include a 70-foot wideplanted median to create an attractive boulevard effect. Thisroadway would be built as a four-lane divided road with thepotential of widening to six lanes if traffic growth so demands.If two additional through lanes were ever needed, the land-scaped median would be reduced to a 46-foot wide land-scaped median.

The design of the North-South Roadway would aid in thepotential creation of super sized blocks, or big land pieces ineast downtown that could attract a new supermarket or officebuildings in a campus setting.

Another piece of the broader picture is the creation of aneastern border for the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Theboulevard travels through the University’s land where it threadsbetween the Beadle Center and the Malone Center. This formsa solid eastern border for the University, which has oftenexpanded upon the Malone neighborhood in the past.

Diverting arterial traffic from the middle of the UNL cam-pus to the eastern edge is another Study objective. A trafficstudy found over one-half of the 30,000 motorists that travelthrough the campus on 16th and 17th Streets per day are notUniversity affiliated, but merely passing through on their wayto north and northeast Lincoln. Anybody that has traveledthese streets through the campus knows this excess traffic com-bined with the more than 3,000 students walking across 16thand 17th Streets to go to their classes, residence halls, Greekhouses and commuter lots, is a serious safety issue. The newboulevard combined with new University parking garages nextto the new roadway would combine to reduce 16th and 17thStreet traffic north of “R” Street from 30,000 motor vehiclesper day down to just 7,000.

A New East-West RoadwayIn addition to the North-South Roadway, a new four lane

East-West Roadway would start at 9th and 10th Streets nearthe south approach of the 10th Street overpass and the northside of Memorial Stadium. The new roadway would extendeastward immediately north of Avery Avenue, first on the southside of the BNSF mainline tracks intersecting with the North-South Roadway on an overpass structure at a signaled intersec-tion near the BNSF mainline railway.

After the North-South Roadway intersection, the six laneEast-West Roadway would bridge over the BNSF Railway andparallel the BNSF mainline tracks on the north side replacingthe diagonal road on the south side of State Fair Park and thenunderneath the North 27th Street overpass where a connectionwould be made to North 27th Street and Cornhusker Highway.This stretch of the East-West Roadway is included in the Phase1 Projects, and when completed, will allow the City to close theNorth 14th and North 17th Streets at-grade rail crossings.

In a subsequent phase, the East-West Roadway splits andone branch goes primarily north crossing Cornhusker Highwayand following Dead Man’s Run waterway on the east sidewhere it will meet another new roadway the City is buildingthis year at North 33rd and Superior Streets. The City’s roadproject this year extends North 33rd Street north near the pro-posed North High School site and curves the roadway back toNorth 27th Street at Fletcher Avenue.

The other branch of the East-West Roadway will gounderneath the BNSF mainline tracks near 29th Street. Theunderpass will then further branch and one stretch will con-nect with the four-lane Huntington/Leighton Avenue atNorth 33rd Street. Another branch will parallel the BNSFmainline tracks on the south side and connect into Adams

Traffic, Traffic, Traffic—Where Have We Been And Where Are We Going?

Waiting for trains to pass is a daily occurance for pedestrians and cars.

Source: 1994 Lincoln-Lancaster County Comprehensive Plan

(continued on page 9)

Street near 35th Street, allowing the dangerous at-grade rail-road crossing at Adams and 35th Streets to be closed. TheNorth 33rd Street at-grade railroad crossing would also beclosed after the City constructs a new North 33rd Streetunderpass.

The North-South and East-West Roadways allow for thecompletion of a downtown bypass. Already forming the bottomedge of this bypass system are the one-way pairs of “L” and“K” Streets (Capitol Parkway). Ninth and 10th Streets form thewestern edge. The new North-South boulevard would com-plete the eastern side and the East-West Roadway finishes thenorthern side of a downtown bypass loop. The new loop wouldpermit through motorists to move better, while allowingmotorists with business downtown to have more road capacityon the central downtown streets.

Approximately 46,000 cars now cross the BNSF rail lines

each day at 14th, 17th, 33rd and Adams Streets, sometimeshaving to wait extended periods for passing trains. This numberhas the potential to increase to 78,000. In addition, rail trafficis expected to continue to grow, causing greater delays andcongestion. Building a road viaduct over the BNSF rail southof the Bob Devaney Center is the biggest Antelope Valley road-way component. The structure would carry approximately40,000 cars north to south and 45,000 cars east to west eachday. This viaduct along with the two proposed underpasses inNortheast Lincoln, would allow four dangerous at-grade cross-ings (14th, 17th, 33rd, and Adams Streets) to be closed. Nolonger would the tracks block these streets 5 hours per day outof 24 hours. In turn, average travel times and emergencyresponses would improve.

The new trails along the waterway, near the DevaneyCenter and sidewalks at the two Northeast Lincoln underpasseswill provide safe alternatives to students and other pedestriansracing to beat the descending arms at the railroad crossings or

worse yet, attempting to crawl between parked rail cars on theirway to activities.

Today, Holdrege Street is the main link between UNL’scity and east campuses. Consequently, approximately 16,000cars per day use Holdrege Street. With the completion of theAntelope Valley transportation package, traffic on HoldregeStreet would be significantly reduced to 5,000 cars per day. Thetravel distance between the two university campuses will beslightly greater via the new East-West Roadway, but it will besafer, with fewer intersections and trip time is expected to bethe same.

Computer models show the new roadways reducingNorth 27th Street traffic by 5,000 trips per day. However, thenew planned growth to the north and to the northeast willcontinue to add traffic to North 27th Street. Still, North 27thStreet is often used by traffic to make northeast to southeastmovement across town. With the addition of the AntelopeValley roadways, better traffic flow on these streets.

Antelope Valley Study—The Big Picture July 17, 2000 Page 9

QPeople often mention the failedNortheast Radial —what is that?

AThe concept of the Northeast Radialbegan in 1952 as a roadway that would

connect downtown/central Lincoln withdeveloping suburbs to the north and east.Capital Parkway had just recently been con-structed to serve southeast Lincoln and manybusiness leaders and elected officials felt a similar roadway was needed for northeastLincoln. From 1968 through 1974, the Cityacquired 287 properties, displacing many fam-ilies and businesses, in an effort to acquire thenecessary road right of ways in advance of theproposed road construction.

Oil prices rose and federal road fundsdiminished. Time passed and the road was notconstructed. Many of the acquired propertieswere deteriorating causing the abutting neigh-borhoods to decline. Sentiment began tochange. In 1980, the City Council voted 5-2to kill the Northeast Radial. Road supportersdecided to put it on the 1981 ballot. Theresulting campaign further divided the commu-nity. The ballot results showed 17,524 againstthe Northeast Radial and 11,644 in support.The road project was defeated and dropped.

QWhat did the City do with the 287acquired properties totaling approxi-mately 83 acres?

ASome homes were initially demolished andturned into vacant lots neighbors thought

were poorly maintained. Other homes deterio-rated and after the Radial’s defeat were demol-ished to facilitate land assembly. The City andlocal neighborhoods developed the RadialReuse Project, which identified the most viablevacant lands that could be resold to familiesand homebuilders to construct new homes.The balance of the vacant lands became a biketrail, various pocket parks and used for otherpublic purposes.

QAren’t the Antelope Valley proposed roadsolutions the same as for the NortheastRadial?

AYes and no. The need to provide bettertraffic circulation between downtown, the

university campus and north and northeastLincoln did not go away when the votersturned down the Northeast Radial. In fact,traffic city-wide has dramatically increased,

there has been significant development inboth north and northeast Lincoln during thelast 20 years, and traffic congestion in theseareas has worsened. Portions of the twoAntelope Valley roadways have similaritieswith the Northeast Radial.

Both concepts start near the end ofInterstate 180 at 9th and 10th Streets andparallel the Burlington Northern State Fatracks.

Both concepts have components that utilize the 19th Street corridor.

And both concepts have routes that servenortheast Lincoln.

While both share similar start and desti-nation points, the Northeast Radial route cutright through and divided residential neigh-borhoods. The Antelope Valley roadways aregenerally located on commercial streets,University lands, and State Fair properties,which collectively skirt around residentialneighborhoods.

While it is difficult to compare roadwayplans and costs in a simple manner, theNortheast Diagonal plans with an elevatedcrossing of the railroad by the Devaney Centerwas estimated to cost about $19 million in1980, and that would be about $50 million in1999 dollars because of escalation in construc-tion costs. A slightly similar part of theAntelope Valley roadway plan would cost $40 to $50 million in today’s dollars.

QCompared to the Northeast Radial, whatare the ‘extra’ traffic benefits thatAntelope Valley provides?

AAntelope Valley starts at “K” and “L”Streets and completes a loop around

downtown and the University campus. Carswill be able to circulate on the edge of down-town, thus avoiding the travel time goingthrough the downtown area. This will providemore road capacity for those cars wanting touse the downtown streets.

Antelope Valley provides NorthwestLincoln better connections by tying intoCornhusker Highway at North 14th Street.Antelope Valley has a road link that helps cre-ate North 33rd Street north of CornhuskerHighway. This will help accommodate thelarge existing and proposed developments inNorth Lincoln along North 27th betweenCornhusker Highway and Interstate 80.

Otherwise, North 27th Street would be further congested in the future.

Antelope Valley roadways provide overpasses and under-passes to allow traffic not tobe blocked by trains trav-eling the BurlingtonNorthern SantaFe rail lines.Today,some

70 coal trains a day block traffic over fivehours in a 24 hour period. The Phase 1Projects would eliminate two at-grade railcrossings (N. 14th and N. 17th Streets) andthe next phase of the Amended Draft SinglePackage would eliminate two more at-graderail crossings (N. 33rd and Adams Street).

QWhat assurances does the communityhave that Antelope Valley roadways willnot cause a big community fight like theNortheast Radial?

AWith a proposal the size and scope ofAntelope Valley, it is expected there will

be debate and some disagreement. The threePartners have spent a great deal of time andmoney not to repeat the mishaps associatedwith the Northeast Radial project. First, thetwo concepts’ planning processes, public inputand review and purposes are substantially dif-ferent. To the community activists involved inboth processes, the Northeast Radial roadproject was an attempt by a handful of busi-ness leaders and officials to impose a top-down solution. The Northeast Radial did notactively seek the public’s input until it was

too late.Antelope Valley

has been more of abottom-up process.

Over 1,000 meetings seek-ing input over four years has

occurred to date and the formalreview process is just starting and

will continue this Summer and Fall. Second, in contrast to the Northeast

Radial’s top to bottom approach, theAntelope Valley Study was an inclusive plan-ning process—stakeholders (neighborhoodsand businesses) have been given the opportu-nity from the beginning of the process to helpdesign the study’s procedural processes as wellas actively review alternatives in public forums,before it is declared a “project” and approvedfor construction.

Third, the Antelope Valley Study is farmore comprehensive in terms of the issuesand needs that were addressed, the geographicareas studied, and how the Study wasapproached. The Northeast Radial was a sin-gle purpose “road project” many thoughtwould seriously harm neighborhood vitality.On the other hand, Antelope Valley haslooked at the bigger picture and identifiedstorm water management, transportationimprovements and community revitalizationissues that work in concert to strengthen thehistorical core. Many critics thought theNortheast Radial proposed route and processseriously harmed abutting neighborhoods.The Phase 1 Projects are designed around thebelief that the attractive waterway, landscapedroadway and proposed community revitaliza-tion strategies will improve the historic core.These reinvestment opportunities will providea viable alternative to the ‘flight’ from thecore to the suburban edge that most biggercities have experienced.

Questions Regarding the Northeast Radial and Antelope Valley

0 St.P St.

Vine St.

9th

St.

10th

St.

Holdrege St.

27th

St.

33rd St.

48th St.

Fremont St.

Q St.

N St.M St.

L St.K St.

Burlington North

ern Santa Fe Railway

Traffic (continued from page 8)

1952 NortheastRadial Plan

Antelope

Valley Study—T

he Big P

ictureJuly 17, 2000

Page 10

Antelope

Valley Study—T

he Big P

ictureJuly 17, 2000

Page 11

In many cities larger than Lincoln, theflight of middle and upper class citizens canbe partly attributed to the lack of supportservices in the core neighborhoods. Citizensnot only want safe core neighborhoods withgood housing units, but also want close prox-imity to nearby churches, parks, recreation,grocery stores, medical services, retailing andcommunity services. Given people’s busylives, minimizing travel time and conflictsbecomes important considerations for peoplechoosing where to live. In larger cities, newerareas provide not only newer housing oppor-tunities but also more opportunities for theseother neighborhood support activities.

Lincoln is starting to see a similar trend.Lincoln’s historic core neighborhoods havewitnessed the departure of many churches,grocery stores, medical services and jobs. The only new retailing opportunities in someneighborhoods are new gas conveniencestores, pawn shops and fast check cashingfacilities. Older neighborhoods in Lincoln arestruggling with stagnation or the disappearanceof key neighborhood support services, whichmakes it difficult for inner city neighborhoodsto attract new families and individuals andretain existing residents.

As a general rule, Lincoln’s central neigh-borhood residents do not want their neigh-borhoods to mimic newer edge areas. Rather,the historic neighborhoods want to maintainand build from their fine attributes, includingdowntown, higher education, entertainment,diverse cultures, historic places, architecturalstyle and large tree canopies.

Trying to maximize the historic core’sstrength while addressing its weaknesses hasbeen a major theme of the community revital-ization efforts during the Antelope Valleyprocess. In fact, ‘Neighborhood Vitality”received the highest community priority of theeight Antelope Valley Purposes and Needs. In turn, the three Partners and the AdvisoryCommittee have spent a considerable amountof effort developing community revitalizationstrategies. Six of these strategies have beenincluded in the Phase 1 Projects list to beimplemented in the next six to 10 years:

• Neighborhood Wrap Around Centers• Recreation: New Northeast Park &

Expanded Trago Park• Trails: New Downtown/University

Trail Loop • Closer to Home • New and Rehab Housing Opportunities• East Downtown: new supermarket, retail-

ing, housing and employment centers.

1.Neighborhood

Wrap-Around Centers: A Key Neighborhood

ComponentWhat is a ‘wrap-around center’? Some

people have compared a wrap-around centerto a neighborhood community center, aschool, a cultural center, a health care facility,a recreation facility, child care center, jobtraining center, a one-stop social service center. Any and all the above can be true.

A wrap-around center is designed for theparticular neighborhood needs and is typicallyphysically housed in an existing building withseveral complementary program activities

“wrapped around” a primary core use, such asa school or community center. Wrap-aroundcenters create efficiencies by having severalactivities and agencies located and workingtogether to provide coordinated communityservices at a single location. By co-locatingmany complementary services and programs,an existing building can be utilized from earlyin the morning until late at night, seven days aweek, twelve months out of the year, thus pro-viding a more convenient location to the users,while saving operational and building costs.

The Amended Draft Single Packageshows five proposed wrap-around centers:

• Elliott Elementary School• North 27th Street/Holdrege

Community Center (former furniturestore area)

• Clyde T. Malone Community Center• Indian/Armory Center• Historic Whittier Junior High School

The five wrap-around centers are strate-gically located in neighborhoods that com-munity based agencies already serve and arealso on hiker/biker trails to encourage walk-ing and bicycle access. Wrap-around servicescould include job training, literacy programs,childcare, computer literacy programs, tutor-ing, library services, year-round meal provi-sion, expanded recreation opportunities,health care, parent support groups, policesubstations, social service offices, adult care,senior centers and other community events.

After the community prioritized thewrap-around center concept in the AntelopeValley Study, the City of Lincoln and LincolnPublic Schools commissioned a communitystudy of the wrap-around concept in thespring of 1998 and established a five-phaseframework for developing wrap-around cen-ters. Community groups are actively develop-ing wrap-around center proposals for ElliottSchool, N. 27th Street & Holdrege, and theMalone Center.

2.Recreation: New

Northeast Park &Expanded Trago ParkBased upon several criteria, Lincoln’s

central neighborhoods are under served whenit comes to recreational opportunities. Inresponse, the Amended Draft Single Packagewould add a new 33-acre Northeast Park toserve the residents of the Clinton, UniversityPlace, Hartley and other area neighborhoods.The proposed location is south of theBurlington Northern Santa Fe railroad tracksand north of Leighton Avenue, between North28th and 33rd Streets. The John Dietrich bike-way runs along the south and east edges of theproposed park, and would connect to a newtrail along Dead Mans Run north to the SaltCreek and Superior Street trails. The AmendedDraft Single Package roadway configuration inthis area would provide park access on thenorth side by extending Huntington Avenuewestward from 33rd Street.

The park proposal includes several programmed recreation activities, includingmultiple softball and soccer fields, a picnicpavilion, restrooms, a playground, sand volley-ball courts, and multi-use sports courts thatwould accommodate tennis or basketball.

The construction of the North-South

Roadway as a Phase 1 Project would displacethree UNL softball fields near 19th & VineStreets. The Northeast Park could providereplacement softball fields for these lost UNLfields. The City Parks and RecreationDepartment and UNL have already outlined acollaborating effort to cost share the opera-tion and maintenance of this new park site.

Trago Park already is a fine eight-acrepark providing recreational opportunities toarea residents. Recently, the City has addedpublic restrooms and other new park ameni-ties at Trago Park in coordination with theAntelope Valley Study.

Under the Amended Draft SinglePackage, Trago Park would be connected tothe new downtown/University loop trail net-work and the park expanded south to “O”Street, adding approximately eight new acres.Not only would the expanded Trago Parkprovide an attractive corridor for the storm-water conveyance, parallel trail and new recre-ational opportunities, but the expanded parkwould also benefit the abutting neighborhoodand encourage redevelopment opportunities.

3.Trails: New Downtown/

University Trail LoopOver the last 12 years, Lincoln has been

busy developing a trail network that is nownationally acclaimed. The recreational andcommuter trail network connects many ofLincoln’s neighborhoods, schools and parks.More new local and regional trail miles areadded yearly. Most people would agree the

trail network has definitely added to Lincoln’squality of life. Despite this success, many ofthe busiest trails head toward theDowntown/University area but often stopmany blocks short of the final destination,causing safety concerns when bicyclists have tocompete with motor vehicles on narrow andbusy streets or compete with pedestrians onfour-foot wide city sidewalks.

A new trail loop would be constructedaround the edges of Downtown andUniversity areas as part of the Phase 1Projects. The new Downtown/Universityloop trail would act as a “hub” connecting the“spokes” of four of Lincoln’s key existingtrails: Rock Island/Billy Wolff, John Dietrich,MoPac and Salt Creek. These connectionswould require short extensions of the existingtrails to link them to the new hub trail. Theextensions and cost estimate are included inthe Amended Draft Single Package.

The eastern side of the new loop trailwould be formed by the new off street trailthat will be incorporated into the expansion ofTrago Park and the new landscaped AntelopeCreek waterway. The loop would then travelaround the University on its northern edgeand proceed west and south through theHaymarket area. Next, the loop trail wouldturn east at “G” Street, using the wide right-of-way. The trail would complete its loop nearLincoln High School where it would connectwith the new waterway trail and the existingRock Island/Billy Wolff trails.

In addition to providing a hub connec-tion for the existing Rock Island, JohnDietrich, MoPac and Salt Creek trails, the new

Antelope Valley Study—The Big Picture July 17, 2000 Page 12

Addressing Neighborhood Vitality and

A St.

Van Dorn

Adams

HavelockSuperior

Interstate 80

Cornhusker Hwy.

Nebraska Hwy. 2

Pioneers

OldCheney

Pine Lake

Superior Street Trail

John Dietr

ich Trail

MurdockTrail

Billy Wolff Trail

HolmesDamTrail

TierraTrail

Wiliamsburg Park

WildernessPark Trails

Roper WestPark Trail

US Hwy. 34

Salt

Cree

k

US Hwy. 77

O St.

Holdrege

9 St.10 St.

17 St.

16 St.

27 St. 48 St.

56 St.

70 St. 84 St.

MoPac TrailVine

14 St.

AntelopeCreek

Rock Island TrailBison Trail

Hwy. 2 Trail

Bike TrailsAntelope ValleyTrailsTrails Proposedby Others

HighlandLoop Trail

Antelope Valley Study—The Big Picture July 17, 2000 Page 13

loop trail would be able to provide better con-nections to other proposed trail expansions. Anew trail is going to be constructed next yearthrough the new baseball and softball complexand over the Burlington Northern Santa Fetracks into the Haymarket area. This newpedestrian way will provide a link to the newloop trail and to the Oak Lake area and even-tually extending up through the I-180 parkand into the Highland/Fallbrook/SuperiorStreet trails.

Fund raising efforts are underway toextend the MoPac (Husker Link) to theUniversity area, which would add a majorconnection between the loop trail and EastLincoln. South Salt Creek neighborhood residents are discussing a new trail connec-tion through their neighborhood, whichagain could link to the new loop trail. A newBison Trail connection to Pioneer Park is inthe final stages, which could provide a con-nection between the new loop trail andSouthwest Lincoln.

The Amended Draft Single Package alsoproposes an on-street loop trail providingneeded neighborhood access to Malone andClinton neighborhoods and a better-definedneighborhood boundary between residentialand commercial land uses. The new trail routewould start at the Downtown/University looptrail and travel east along “Q” Street and thenturn north along N. 26th Street. This routewould then connect to both theMoPac/Husker Link and the John DietrichBikeway.

4.Closer to Home andHousing Strategies

As part of the Antelope Valley process,the three Partners sponsored a series of neigh-borhood workshops to encourage the elevenAntelope Valley neighborhoods to defineneighborhood vitality strategies for the collec-tive core as well as each individual neighbor-hood. Often, these defined strategies areneither big-ticket items nor very glamorous,but do have an immediate impact to neigh-borhood safety, aesthetics and property values.These basic items can be accomplished inclose proximity to peoples homes.

Therefore, they are often called “closerto home” strategies and include: Alley pavingor re-rocking; sidewalk repairs; tree trimming,planting and removal; street repairs; parkimprovements/expansion; clean up trash andweeds; street and alley light improvements;fence and screening programs; street calmingand abatement of cut-through traffic; dilapi-dated housing; affordable housing, high density issues; porch building program; neigh-borhood based retail; trails; lack of convenientpublic transportation; and vacant buildingsand lots.

Meanwhile, the City of Lincoln has notwaited for the completion of the AntelopeValley Study and has been working with prio-rity neighborhoods in implementing severalnew closer to home initiatives in addition tothe City’s traditional housing and communitydevelopment programs.

As part of the Antelope Valley effort,Congressman Doug Bereuter assisted the Cityin securing a $750,000 federal grant. The Citythen combined portions of the federal grantwith available tax increment financing (TIF)

funds to carry out closer to home strategies inthe Clinton, Malone and Hawley Historicalareas. Last year efforts totaled approximately$800,000 and included:

• 39 alleys graveled• 3 streets resurfaced• 25 blocks of curbs replaced on both sides

of the street • 68 blocks of replaced sidewalks

The Closer to Home Exterior Repair(CHED) housing program was also developedand committed $400,000 of funds includingmonies from the Bereuter assisted federalgrant and the State of Nebraska AffordableHousing Trust Fund. These funds were madeavailable to Clinton, Hawley, Hartley, Maloneand North Bottoms neighborhoods andresulting activities include:

• 7 homes have received extensive repairs• 10 homes are under construction• 25 homes are scheduled to receive repairs• 25 additional applications are being

reviewed.The Clean Neighborhoods Program is

another closer to home strategy. The City haspurchased tools to assist neighborhoods inself-help clean up projects. The Malone,Hawley, Hartley, Clinton and North Bottomsneighborhood associations can check outthese tools.

In addition, the City of Lincoln UrbanDevelopment Department has assisted or isassisting Malone, Clinton, North Bottoms,Everett, South Salt Creek, Woods Park andNear South and Downtown Neighborhoodin developing focus area plans that particu-larly define specific sets of housing and community revitalization strategies for theparticipating neighborhood. In turn, theseplans will be funded with federal and cityfunds along with self help voluntary effortsby the neighborhoods.

5.New and Rehab

Housing OpportunitiesNew or expanded housing construction

is another Antelope Valley strategy. Public par-ticipants indicate the need to provide new andrehabilitated housing opportunities in the areafor low, middle and high income families andindividuals. As part of the neighborhoodworkshops, the goal to maintain and increasethe number of single-family residencesreceived a high priority. In the flood plain,many owners have not been able to makehousing improvements. Building The NewAntelope Creek Channel will narrow the floodplain, thus opening these areas to housingrenewal. Neighborhoods Inc. has also beenbusy strengthening neighborhoods by fundingloans to many homeowners in the AntelopeValley Study area. Presently, Neighborhoods,Inc. is undertaking a strategic planningprocess to see how it might be able to provideexpanded housing and related services to thecore neighborhoods.

At the outer edges of these neighbor-hoods, the Antelope Valley Study proposeshigher density housing, such as condomini-ums, loft apartments and attractive rowhouses. One possible expanded housing loca-tion is along 18th Street, north of “K” Street(the Near South neighborhood) to the UNLCity Campus. Additional areas for considera-tion of higher residential densities exist east of

the new North-South Roadway and on bothsides of the attractive new waterway.

The proposed budget for the Phase 1Projects also includes funds to help the CityUrban Development Department relocateviable homes that would be acquired as partof the waterway and roadway right of wayacquisition process. Study participants believesome of these older homes can successfully berelocated as in-fill housing on vacant lots andprovide complementary style housing.

6.East Downtown: New

water walk, supermarket,retailing, housing andemployment centers

Most citizens view the eastern edge ofdowntown to be 17th Street. However, manyblocks of downtown businesses and down-town B-4 zoned land are located east of 17thStreet. To many citizens this east downtown“auto land” area is unattractive, has inade-quate traffic circulation, and does notstrengthen the rest of downtown, Haymarketarea and UNL. The Antelope Valley Phase 1Projects attemptto address theseconcerns.

The combi-nation and loca-tion of theproposed water-way and North-South Roadwaywould be the firstmajor wave ofimprovements.The new aestheticwaterway wouldremove the threatof the designated100-year floodfrom generally19th to 25thStreets. The con-struction of alandscaped boule-vard with wide medians along the 19th Streetcorridor would increase the traffic flow andprovide business visibility. The removal of thedesignated flood plain on the UNL campuswould allow the University to implement itsmaster plan, which shows seven futureresearch buildings located close to the BeadleCenter. These new university activities willborder the east downtown area on the northand will further reinforce the opportunity forredevelopment and prosperity between tradi-tional downtown and the new waterway. Inaddition, this enhanced research activity willattract venture capital to the city, benefitingLincoln and the State.

If the east downtown area is given theproper attention and public improvementinvestments, it is anticipated the private sectorwould respond positively, like it did in theHaymarket area, by improving this east down-town area. After reviewing the Antelope ValleyStudy, early response by some of Lincoln’smajor building developers has been positive.The common message from these developershas been that the elected officials will have tocommit to the new waterway and roadway sothere is a level of confidence that the flooding

threat will be removed and traffic circulationimproved before large private sector dollarswill reinvest in the area.

An important concern is not to competewith the current Downtown, but to add tothe range of Downtown opportunities. Theproposed roadway and stormwater improve-ments are not the end, but the first steps toencourage additional private reinvestments.The Amended Draft Single Package envisionsmany new private sector redevelopment proj-ects in this area in response to the AntelopeValley public investments.

SupermarketCentral Lincoln area residents have

expressed a need for a new downtown super-market. Market analysis and interviews withmajor supermarket chains confirm a supermar-ket would be successful in the east downtownarea, near the proposed North-SouthRoadway and “O” Street. Contributing fac-tors include the large projected traffic countson the proposed North-South Roadway and“O” Street, the large UNL, downtown andcore area populations living and working inthe area, and the potential increased residen-tial population attracted to the new housing

opportunities. Depending upon the size andparking needs for a new supermarket, up totwo blocks would have to be assembled.

Market Place “P” StreetOne of this community’s major architec-

tural assets is the former Rock Island trainstation, now owned and utilized by UnionBank. The old train station, a building listedin the National Register of Historic Places, islocated between the proposed roadway andthe waterway. The Antelope Valley plan envi-sions this structure along with new retail,office and housing development in the imme-diate vicinity helping to anchor a mixed usedevelopment in the east downtown area,while encouraging Market Place (“P” Street)entertainment activities to grow towards thenew waterway. Eventually, Market Place couldbe anchored by the historic Burlington trainstation (Lincoln Station) in the Haymarketand the historic Union Bank/Rock Islandtrain station near the new waterway, alllocated immediately south of and parallelingthe UNL campus.

Other Community Revitalization Opportunities

Design charette of proposed entrance feature at O Street.

Project Cost EstimatesThe proposed Phase 1 Projects would take approximately

six to 10-years to construct at a cost of approximately $175 million in today’s dollars. Subject to completion of

detail plans, preliminary cost estimates include:

Waterway, Bridges, Trails & Landscape $54 million

Railroad Grade Separation Road Improvements $52 million

North-South & East-West Roadways with Trail & Landscape $36 million

East Downtown Redevelopment $13 million

Neighborhood Development & Closer-to-Home Strategies $9 million

Northeast Park & Trago Park $7 million

Community Wrap-Around Community Centers $3 million

Balance of Bike Trail Loop $1 million

TOTAL = $175 Million [1999 Dollars] over 6 to 10 years

Antelope Valley Study—The Big Picture July 17, 2000 Page 14

Proposed Project FundingFunding for the $175 million Phase 1 Projects could comefrom a variety of federal, state, and local funding sources

over a six to 10-year period:

Federal government, including Water Resources Funds, Road Demonstration Funds, Urban Development Grants, and Park Grants $49 million

State of Nebraska, including State Park Grant, Housing Funds, and a $25 million requested appropriation from the Nebraska Legislature for State benefits $28 million

City of Lincoln’s share of the State of Nebraska gas tax monies, often referred to as State Road Funds $18 million

City of Lincoln’s share of the federal gas tax monies, often referred to as Federal TEA-21 Road Funds $7 million

City of Lincoln, including Highway Allocation Funds, Urban Development Funds, and Park Development Funds $10 million

City bonded tax increment, generated by additional real estate taxes paid by the private sector based upon new development and rehabilitation efforts $10 million

State and University land transfers $11 million

Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway $12 million

Private investors, corporations and foundations $12 million

Lower Platte South Natural Resources District (LPSNRD) $10 million

Railroad Transportation Safety District $8 million

TOTAL = $175 Million [1999 Dollars] over 6 to 10 years

The proposed funding sources, spread over six to ten years, seem to be reasonable amounts to allocate to Antelope Valley—yet allowing other priority Partner projects to also be funded and built. Each year the Partnerswill need to formally approve their budgets, thus the funding numbers aredeemed “proposed.”

No significant increases in City property taxes are planned because ofthese capital improvements. Assuming the Antelope Valley Study receives“project” approval, the City’s current Capital Improvement Budget and Planfor Fiscal Year 1999-2005 (“CIP”) already includes the “place holder” trans-portation resources as stated above, while also continuing to fund the otherCity priority road projects.

The LPSNRD could apply to the Nebraska Natural ResourcesCommission for funds as well as use LPSNRD general funds.

As part of the funding, the State of Nebraska and the University ofNebraska-Lincoln will transfer property and right of way valued at approxi-mately $11 million. The University will not divert nor use existing state gen-eral funds, or tuition revenue for the proposed Phase 1 Projects.

Under an amendment to the Interlocal Agreement, the three Partnerswill define responsibilities for the ongoing operating, maintenance, repairs,and replacement costs.

$54WaterwayProject

$88RoadwayProjects

$33CommunityRevitalization

Cost Estimates(In Millions)

$49Federal

$39State

$45City

$10LPSNRD

$8RTSD

$24Private

Funding(In Millions)

Antelope Valley Study—The Big Picture July 17, 2000 Page 15

Antelope Valley Milestones to DateAugust 1995–Spring 1996 Process Committee develops Public Involvement Process and Work Plan for the Antelope Valley Study.

June 1996 Formation of Advisory Committee.

September 1996 Town Hall 1 identifies Eight Purposes & Needs of the Study and develops over 100 solutions.

Fall 1996 Study Team analyzes and screens over 100 potential options.

November 1996 Super Commons (Mayor, City Council, County Board and Planning Commission with UNL andLPSNRD representatives) approves the early portions of the Antelope Valley Study.

March 1997–July 1997 Advisory Committee reviews over 100 community revitalization, transportation and stormwater solutionsand creates four alternative packages of the best solutions.

July 1997–November 1997 A draft of the best Single Package Plan is developed by the Advisory Committee for public review.

November 1997 Town Hall 2 reviews the Draft Single Package.

December 1997 Super Commons recommends the Draft Single Package as part of City-County Comprehensive Plan.

August 28, 1998 City Council approves the Amended Draft Single Package but asked Three Partners to further study “5specific Issue Areas.”

September–October 1998 After many public meetings, Advisory Committee reaches consensus on “5 Issue Areas.”

November 16, 1998 City Council approves the “5 Issue Areas” as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan.

January–September 1999 Study Team and Advisory Committee prepare and revise preliminary Functional Design Plans on Phase 1of the Amended Draft Single Package.

April 1999 Partners send Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) to federal government.

May 4, 1999 City Council approves the Amended Draft Single Package as an amendment to the Comprehensive Planbut asked that the “P” Street proposal be revisited.

June 2000 Federal government deems DEIS complete and ready for public review and comments.

June 2000 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers deems the Draft Feasibility Report and Draft Environmental Assessmentcomplete and ready for public review and comments.

Upcoming MilestonesThe optimistic timetable for the first set of governmental approvals would be the Fall of 2000, with pos-sible construction beginning in the Fall of 2001 and taking six to 10 years to complete. Next steps possi-bly (optimal time line) include:

July 24, 25, 26 & 27, 2000 Open Houses to review and ask questions on Amended Draft Single Package, Draft Feasibility Reportand Draft Environmental Assessment, Draft Environmental Impact Statement, and the proposed Phase 1Projects.

July 29, 2000 Bus Tours of the proposed Phase 1 Projects. Several translators available for non-English speaking arearesidents.

August 1st and 2nd, 2000 Town Hall 3 and public hearings on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Assessment of EffectsReport and the Draft Feasibility Report and Draft Environmental Assessment.

August 1st and 2nd, 2000 Joint Antelope Valley Authority (JAVA) sponsors public review and hearings on the Amended DraftSingle Package and the proposed Phase 1 Projects.

Fall 2000 The City gives first round approval to the Amended Draft Single Package as Comprehensive PlanAmendment and Phase 1 Projects funding.

Winter 2000 Other federal, state and local agencies and entities review and grant other necessary governmentalapprovals.

Fall 2000 to Summer 2001 JAVA carries out the next stage of functional design, budgeting and pre-construction activities.

Estimated start: Summer 2001 Three partners approve Implementation Phase of the Interlocal Agreement, permitting JAVA to carryout implementation and construction of the Phase 1 Projects.

Construction begins and takes five to nine years to complete the Phase 1 Projects.

Antelope Valley Study—The Big Picture July 17, 2000 Page 16

When Lincoln backers of Antelope Valleyneed an example to illustrate their vision, theyoften use a flood control and redevelopmentproject 200 miles away. Kansas City has spent$86 million to reduce flooding along BrushCreek, a drainage basin in the middle of thecity that links such well-to-do areas asCountry Club Plaza with poorer, inner-cityneighborhoods. The roots of the flood-con-trol project and related redevelopments dateto one of Kansas City’s worst tragedies.During heavy rains in 1977, Brush Creekfilled with water and jumped its banks. Theensuing floods killed 25 people and causedabout $100 million in damage, much of it inCountry Club Plaza, the expensive shoppingarea south of downtown. Afterward, the cityand U.S. Army Corps of Engineers developeda plan to prevent similar tragedies.

In 1991, after years of discussion andvoter approval of a $50 million bond issue,the city began to deepen and widen the creek.Bridges were raised because the structures canact like a dam during heavy rains. More than amile of Brush Creek has been changed to

reduce the chance of flooding, but another$36 million in improvements for another mileare needed. Officials have yet to find themoney.

But the improvements made so far arecredited with doing what they were supposedto do: Saving lives and property.

Kansas City’s last deadly flood occurredin October, 1998. Four to 6 inches of rain fellin a few hours. The downpour, made worseby suburban development and the city’srolling hills, caused floods that killed 11 peo-ple. In the improved areas of Brush Creek, thewater swelled dramatically but stayed withinits banks. Unlike 21 years ago, Country ClubPlaza was spared.

Downstream areas that have yet to beimproved were not so fortunate. A low bridgescheduled for replacement caused water toback up and flooded dozens of nearby apart-ments. Water spilled over a low bridge atanother location and took five people to theirdeaths. The deaths and destruction promptedanger from some people who questionedwhether the creek’s improvements were made

first in the Country Club Plaza at the expenseof poorer residents downstream. City officialsreplied that the Country Club area wasimproved first because that is where most of the damage occurred in 1977. And, theynoted, the improvements have yet to be finished. “If we hadn’t done these improve-ments, the October storm would have causedmore damage than in 1977,” DennisMcMann, a parks officials, said during a recenttour of the area. “Even though it was less rain,it came in a shorter time. The improvementsdid the job here, but unfortunately theyhaven’t been done farther downstream.”

The water in Brush Creek is controlledby a series of dams operated by the city’sParks Department. On a recent visit, wateralong much of the creek had been drained toallow new construction as well as repairs fromthe October storm. Next to the Country ClubPlaza, however, the creek remained an attrac-tive waterway 3 to 8 feet deep. Water circu-lated by pumps flowed over the concrete linerthat drops in stair-step fashion at one point tocreate a waterfall effect. Downstream, a foun-

tain sprays water 40 feet into the air.Sidewalks, extensive landscaping and bridgeswith pedestrian walkways add to the pictur-esque scene.

Private and nonprofit developers havejoined the city in investing in the creek corri-dor. Multi-million dollar buildings are goingup or are planned for the area, including thenew headquarters for the KaufmannFoundation, the Stowers Institute for MedicalResearch and an H & R Block service center.“None of this would be happening withoutthe creek being improved because the infra-structure wouldn’t be present,” said FrankEllis, chairman of Model Cities Health Corp.,a nonprofit corporation that has built a $21million health clinic, drug treatment centerand day care center near the creek. An affiliatehousing development has started and there are plans for a shopping center and offices.In the past, the area had flooded every six toeight years.Reprinted with permission from Lincoln Journal Star/Ed Russo.

Kansas City Project Provides an Example

While much effort has gone into locatingprojects of the Amended Draft Single Projectto avoid the need to acquire private property,a relatively small number will need to be purchased for a greater public good. In orderto reduce flood damages and the designated100-year flood plain and provide a better andsafer road network, approximately 46 homesand 44 businesses need to be acquired to pro-vide the necessary public right-of-way for theopen channel and roadways in the AmendedDraft Single Package Phase 1 Projects. Manyresident and business people have already

expressed a willingness to be acquired andrelocated, while many others would prefer to stay.

“The toughest part for elected officialsand city staff is acquiring people’s homes andbusinesses that the owners and tenants spentmany, many hard years to create and want tostay put,” said Roger Figard, the AntelopeValley Project Manager and City Engineer.“Since the beginning of our democracy, gov-ernment has had the power to acquire an indi-vidual’s property for a public purposeprovided that government compensates the

individual with a fair market value price. Inaddition to paying fair market value for anindividual’s property, state and federal lawsrequire local government to pay these citizensfor their relocation and moving expenses.”

“Nevertheless, the disruption to people’slives and livelihood is great and we need toappreciate and do everything we can underthe law to assist them,” added Figard. “Weask them to sacrifice a great deal for the goodof the bigger community. In this case, theirsacrifices will allow over 800 residences and200 business to be free of the 100-year

designated flood threat and provide a betterroad network that will reduce congestion,increase travel time and help abate inner-cityblight for many, many citizens. It is an unfor-tunate consequence, but it is part of thedemocratic process and elected officials aregiven the responsibility for making those decisions on behalf of the whole community.”

The Antelope Valley Plan includes relo-cating viable homes that would be acquired aspart of the water and roadway onto vacantand fill in lots.

Some Will Be Asked To Move For A Greater Public Good

Antelope Valley Study—The Big Picture July 17, 2000 Page 17

It would be difficult for the three separate governing bod-ies to independently address all the issues and detailed decisionson a six to 10-year set of interrelated projects in a timely fash-ion. To help provide an efficient and coordinating governingstructure, the three Partners designed the Joint Antelope ValleyAuthority (JAVA) in March of this year.

Created by a written Interlocal Agreement, JAVA is anadministrative governmental entity created to help disseminateAntelope Valley Study information to the public and electedofficials, complete final project design, secure project fundingfrom private individuals, corporations, foundations and differ-ent levels of government and construct the approved Phase 1Projects.

A three member administrative board governs JAVA, witheach Partner appointing a board member. The administrativeboard members include Glenn Johnson, General Manager ofthe Lower Platte South Natural Resources District, Scott Lewis,Interim Vice Chancellor for Business and Finance for theUniversity of Nebraska-Lincoln, and Allan Abbott, City PublicWorks Director. The acting Project Manager for JAVA is RogerFigard, who is also the City Engineer.

Representatives of the Lincoln-Lancaster County RailroadTransportation Safety District, State of Nebraska Department

of Administrative Services, Nebraska State Board ofAgriculture, and Nebraska Military Department are invited to participate at meetings of JAVA as ex-officio nonvotingmembers. All public accountability and open meeting rulesapply to JAVA.

If the necessary governmental approvals are secured thisfall, JAVA would begin a first year work plan. These proposedactivities include: design and pre-construction activities for thePhase 1 Projects, preparation of the necessary propertyappraisals, acquisition and relocation assistance programs, vol-untary acquisition, and finalizing the funding and financingpackage with the State of Nebraska and other funding sources.A citizen committee will also be formed to provide input andadvice to JAVA and the three Partners.

If the first year activities are successful, the three Partners would approve a supplemental Interlocal Agreement.Subsequent years (five to nine years) activities would include:complete design, funding, property acquisition, relocation assistance programs, construction and implementation of thePhase 1 Projects.

The three Partners believe JAVA offers the best joint decision-making and accountability model to insure successfulproject review and implementation within financial constraints,

while allowing each Partner to reserve all its authorization,appropriation, bonding and taxing powers.

JAVA has no authority to levy taxes or to bond the creditor revenues of any Partner. Each year, the Administrative Boardof JAVA will prepare and distribute to each Partner a recom-mended funding amount needed from each Partner. In turn,each Partner’s governing body retains control over its ownannual budget processes based upon legal and fiscal constraints,while remaining responsive to ever changing situations, shifts inpublic interest, and emergencies.

After the completion of a specific project, JAVA will trans-fer all improvements and real estate to the appropriate individ-ual Partner for ongoing operation and maintenance.

One of the primary benefits of coordinating and carryingout an interrelated and multi-jurisdictional set of projects over a multi-year time frame is that each of the Antelope ValleyPartners contributes a relatively small portion of the overallPhase 1 Project investment of funds, assets and administrativeservices, and in return creates relatively high public benefits.In order to create the desirable net public benefit, each govern-mental Partner will provide its share of the funds, assets andadministrative services over the Phase 1 time frame based uponan agreed budget.

Joint Antelope Valley Authority

Reports Available for Review and Comment:Antelope Valley Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Federal Highway Administration, June, 2000 (DEIS)

Antelope Creek Draft Feasibility Report and Draft Environmental Assessment, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, June, 2000 (Feasibility Report)

Assessment of Effect to NRHP and NRHP-Eligible Sites and Properties in theAntelope Valley Study Area, Antelope Valley Study Team,

June 2000 (Assessment of Effect)

These reports and all other Antelope Valley Study reports are available at City Libraries as well as theLincoln Planning Department and City Council Clerk’s offices at 555 South 10th Street. The DEIS,Draft Feasibility Report and Draft Environmental Assessment and Assessment of Effects Report can beseen at the website www\ci.lincoln.ne.us\city\pworks\index.htm

The Antelope Valley Study has published six newsletters beginning in January, 1996 throughMarch, 1999. There will be continued publications as the process moves forward to keep you up todate. If you would like to receive a newsletter, please contact Antelope Valley Study Team, 1111Lincoln Mall, Lincoln, NE 68508, phone (402) 474-6311.

AcknowledgementsAntelope Valley Partners wish to thank the

Lincoln-Journal Star for the fine series of

articles published January 10–13, 1999.

Many ideas and concepts were used to help

prepare this publication.

Antelope Valley Partners also would like

to thank the many people and organizations

for their assistance in preparing the Antelope

Valley Study supplement.

For further questions or comments, please

contact: Antelope Valley Study Team, 1111

Lincoln Mall, Suite 111, Lincoln, Nebraska

68508, Phone (402) 474-6311,

When a plan or project potentiallyinvolves a significant federal action or federalfunding, then a federal EnvironmentalImpact Statement may be required. A DraftEnvironmental Impact Statement for the 15-20 year vision known as the “Amended DraftSingle Package” has been prepared by theAntelope Valley Study Team. In turn, theFederal Government published in the FederalRegister a Notice on the Availability, June 30,

2000, that the 446 page Antelope Valley DraftEnvironmental Impact Statement meets federalrequirements for completeness and is readyfor a minimum 45 day public review andcomment period. After the comment periodis over and the document is revised accord-ingly to address substantive comments, thecompleted Environmental Impact Statementis given to decision makers to utilize in theirdecision-making process.

An Environmental Impact Statement is adocument containing thorough informationabout a proposed action. The EnvironmentalImpact Statement process helps assure thatsignificant adverse impacts possibly resultingfrom the Amended Draft Single Package havebeen avoided where possible and that anyremaining adverse impacts will be beneficiallymitigated. The reasonable alternatives evalu-ated in detail in the Draft EnvironmentalImpact Statement includes only theAmended Draft Single Package (PreferredAlternative) and a No-Action Alternative.

Highlights Of Some Of The Potential

Major EnvironmentalImpact Areas

Compared to the No-Action Alternative,some of the potential major environmentalimpact areas of the Amended Draft SinglePackage are:

Affected Communities: Neighborhood Cohesion: With the

Amended Draft Single Package, existingneighborhood boundaries would be rein-forced with clear land use and transitionboundaries. Overall quality of life for resi-dents would be improved as cut-throughtraffic is removed from neighborhood streets.

Community Resources: Trail connec-tions and recreational opportunities wouldbe enhanced, service access to downtown forresidents would be improved, and some

vehicle access routes would be altered (butmaintained).

Safety and Security: Four at-grade railcrossings would be removed to improvesafety. Some emergency vehicle responseroutes would change, but access would bemaintained and improved. The potential forloss of property and life during a 100-yearflood would be virtually eliminated.

Environmental Justice:Neither minority nor low-income populations willreceive disproportionatelyhigh or adverse impacts as a result of a project. Thesouthernmost one-fourth ofthe study area has the highestpercentage of minority andlow-income populations.While there are impacts tothis area (for example, mostresidential buildings thatwould be acquired are in thesouthernmost study section),the benefit would be that

remaining homes and businesses would nolonger be within a floodplain. Traffic wouldnot use residential streets as a throughway.New housing and rehabilitation programs arecentered in these areas, too.

Acquisition and Relocation: With theAmended Draft Single Package, 46 residen-tial buildings containing 48 households, and64 privately-owned, non-residential buildingscontaining 44 businesses would be acquiredat fair market value. Eleven publicly ownedbuildings would also be acquired andreplaced along with three softball fields andfour other UNL recreation fields/courts.Relocation assistance would be provided inaccordance with federal and state require-ments. Some homes deemed structurallysound and consistent with neighborhoodintegrity may be relocated to nearby vacantparcels as part of a separate City communityrevitalization program.

Economic: In the short-term, theAmended Draft Single Package wouldslightly reduce annual property tax revenues.However, the long-term gains in tax revenuesas the downtown and neighborhood redevel-opment plans are realized would more thanoffset the short-term losses. The AmendedDraft Single Package would also generateconstruction jobs over a 15-year period.Some jobs may relocate outside the studyarea through business relocations, but down-town redevelopment and some of the com-munity revitalization measures would createnew jobs for area residents.

Pedestrians and Bicyclists: Therewould be positive, long-term impacts on thebicycle and pedestrian environment. Safetywould be enhanced as pedestrians and bicy-clists are separated from motor vehicle andrail traffic. Connecting the separate trails willencourage broader use of the system.

Air Quality: Air quality at over-capacityintersections would be better under theAmended Draft Single Package since carswould idle less at over-capacity intersections.

Noise: With the Amended Draft SinglePackage, 15 study area properties have beenidentified with a potential exterior noiseimpact as defined by the Federal HighwayAdministration. Of these, 12 are residential,two are commercial, and one is recreational. Arange of actions to mitigate noise was consid-ered, including constructing noise barriers, orinstalling acoustical windows. The City mayalso choose to establish buffer zones throughzoning to limit development in areas wheretraffic noise is incompatible with land uses.

Vibrations: No adverse long-termimpacts are anticipated since roadway vibra-tions at the UNL Beadle Center—where sen-sitive microscopes are in use—are very lowand are less than those already caused by thebuilding’s mechanical systems.

Floodplains: With the Amended Draft

Single Package, the Antelope Creek flood-plain would be reduced to a channel, result-ing in about 1,100 fewer structures withinthe floodplain.

Threatened and Endangered Species:No threatened and endangered species arelocated within the study area.

Water Body Modification: TheAmended Draft Single Package would pro-vide long-term wildlife and aquatic habitatimprovements through an increased length ofopen stream, improved channel cross section,a continuous landscaped greenbelt, and anew pond near Lewis Ball Fields.

Cultural Resources: The AmendedDraft Single Package alignments and charac-ter avoid adverse effect on any protected cultural resource, except the environs of the

Summary of Environmental Impacts

Antelope Valley Study—The Big Picture July 17, 2000 Page 18

Draft Environmental Impact Statement

Potential

Impacts

Alternative Considered

Amended Draft Single Package No-Action Alternative

Affected Communities Impacts are overwhelmingly positive since linear improvements follow neighbor-hood boundaries.

There would be no impacts, other than thoseassociated with non-Antelope Valley projects.

Environmental Justice Most benefits and impacts occur in the southern most one-fourth of the studyarea, the area of Lincoln with the highest percentage of minority and low-incomeresidents. Extensive public involvement effort has included representatives fromthe southern most study section.

There would be no impacts, other than thoseassociated with non-Antelope Valley projects.Benefits of the Amended Draft SinglePackage would not be realized.

Land Use The Amended Draft Single Package would introduce facilities that are con-sistent with land uses in the study area.

The No-Action Alternative would maintainmismatched land uses downtown, and isless consistent with the officially adoptedplans of the study Partners.

Economic Impacts Long-term gains in tax revenues would result as the downtown redevelop-ment plans are realized, offsetting any short-term losses. The AmendedDraft Single Package would generate construction jobs for 15 years. Somejobs would be moved outside the study area, but downtown redevelopmentand revitalization measures would create new jobs for area residents.

Tax revenues would remain the same ordecline, while far less construction-relatedemployment and little long-term job cre-ation would occur.

Pedestrians andBicyclists

New trails and trail connections would be provided at key links. Trails would remain unlinked through down-town, with no new north-south scenic trailalong Antelope Creek.

Air Quality No air quality impacts are anticipated. No impacts are anticipated

Noise Impacts would occur at 15 properties, with mitigation considered for each. No impacts are anticipated

Vibrations No long-term impacts are anticipated, and short-term impacts would be miti-gated.

No impacts are anticipated

Lighting No impacts with light side-shields at Beadle Center. No lighting Impacts are anticipated

Wetlands An estimated 0.36 hectare (0.90 acre) of wetlands would be affected andpotential mitigation sites are under investigation. Permit applications wouldbe prepared during final design, prior to construction.

No impacts would occur, other than thoseassociated with non-Antelope Valley proj-ects.

Floodplains Antelope Creek floodplain width would be reduced. Reduced risk of floodingwould remove disincentives to redevelopment, reduce flood insurance costsfor many, improve public safety, and enable revitalization of urban core.

No change to Antelope Creek floodplainwould occur.

Threatened/Endanger Species

No impacts would occur. No impacts would occur.

Farmland No impacts would occur. No impacts would occur.

Water Quality No impacts are anticipated. Potential aquatic wildlife benefits with well watersupplements to Antelope Creek during low flow periods.

No impacts are anticipated.

Water BodyModifications

Long-term wildlife and aquatic habitat improvements would occur throughimproved channel morphology, a continuous landscaped greenbelt, and pos-sible supplementation of streamflow and a new pond.

No impacts are anticipated.

Cultural Resources Three potentially National Register of Historic Places-eligible archeologicalsites and six historic buildings would be adversely effected.

No impacts are anticipated.

Environmental RiskSites

Hazardous substance and petroleum release sites would be avoided to theextent possible. Where encountered, contaminated soil will be removed andcontaminated water treated in accordance with state law.

No impacts are anticipated.

Visual Impacts The few important views in the study area, such as that of the State Capitol,would not be negatively impacted. The intersection of the North-South andEast-West Roadways would be elevated and would be visible in the sur-rounding vicinity—thus, changing the existing visual character.

No impacts would occur.

Energy The one-time expenditure of energy during construction would eventually becompensated somewhat by long-term energy savings.

No impacts would occur.

Physiography,Topography, Geologyand Soils.

No impacts would occur. No impacts would occur.

Wild and Scenic Rivers No impacts would occur. No impacts would occur.

Coastal Zones &Management

No impacts would occur. No impacts would occur.

Permits All necessary permits will be applied for prior to construction. No impacts would occur.

Construction Short-term impacts to be mitigated to the extent practical. No impacts would occur.

Acquisition andRelocation

121 buildings would be acquired, including 46 residential buildings (48 households) and 75 commercial buildings (44 businesses), includes 11public buildings.

There would be no impacts, other thanthose associated with non-Antelope Valleyprojects.

Design charette of potential development south of “O” Street.

Antelope Valley Study—The Big Picture July 17, 2000 Page 19

State Arsenal listed in the National Registerof Historic Places and five houses, potentiallyeligible for listing in the National Register ofHistoric Places. Mitigation to protect theState Arsenal may include improved display-ing area around the building. The historichouses may be relocated under the City’scommunity revitalization program. However,if it is determined that any of them cannot bemoved, such buildings would be documentedprior to being removed.

Environmental Risk Sites: Based on asearch of federal and state databases, ninepotential hazardous substance release sites,51 known petroleum release sites, and 59potential petroleum release sites are locatedadjacent to components of the AmendedDraft Single Package. Mitigation measuresinclude avoiding the sites, removing the con-taminated media or building materials, ortreating contamination on-site.

Visual: The intersection of the North-South and East-West Roadways, however,would be elevated approximately 9 meters(30 feet) above grade, and would be visible inthe surrounding vicinity—thus, changing the

existing visual character. The important viewsin the study area, such as that of the StateCapitol, would not be negatively impacted.

Permits: Among those permits andcompliances necessary for the Amended DraftSingle Package are: US Army Corps ofEngineers Section 404 of the Clean WaterAct, Section 401 Water Quality Certification(NDEQ), City of Lincoln/Lancaster CountyFloodplain Development Permit, andNational Pollutant Discharge EliminationSystem Permit. Agreements with the BNSFRailway and area utilities are also necessary.

Construction: Short-term impacts associated with the Amended Draft SinglePackage include traffic, air quality, soil ero-

sion, water quality degradation, noise, andvibration. Appropriate mitigation would beprovided for all identified impacts. Short-termimpacts would be managed and mitigatedthrough an agreement between JAVA, thePartners, and the construction contractor.

Relationship Between Short-termUses of Man’s Environment and theMaintenance and Enhancement of Long-term Productivity: More consistent land usepatterns in central Lincoln would evolve,socioeconomic systems would benefit fromprivate investment opportunities, throughtraffic would be removed from residentialneighborhoods, safety would be improved at railroad crossings, and access to goods and services in Lincoln’s core would beimproved. Impacts to ecological systemswould be minimal.

Secondary Impacts: A number of thecommunity revitalization components aresecondary actions since they are dependenton containing the Antelope Creek floodplainand/or providing better access to and fromLincoln’s core. These components includethe downtown supermarket, downtownmixed-use development, stormwater conveyance-related parks, new downtown

housing, and trails. The impacts of theseactions are overwhelmingly positive. Otheractions that are planned (sometimes by oth-ers) to occur include redevelopment at StateFair Park, construction of a new health clinic,and the relocation of displaced housing tovacant, in-fill sites.

Traffic Impacts: The growth forecast inLincoln is expected to result in a 44 percentincrease in overall traffic as the regionapproaches the “Build Out Scenario,”which provides the basis for the No-ActionAlternative and the Amended Draft SinglePackage. Under the No-Action Alternative,more traffic to and from downtown usesstreets that would go through neighbor-hoods and UNL because there are few alter-

natives around these areas. In addition, agreater percentage of intersections would beover capacity with the No-Action Alternativeas compared to the Amended Draft SinglePackage (62 vs. 30 percent).

Access: The angled railroad tracks in thestudy area create problems for traffic opera-tions by blocking some streets from connect-ing over the tracks. More and longer trainsblock traffic on streets that do cross thetracks for several hours every day. Future traf-fic (over 77,000 vehicles per day) will con-tinue to be subject to delays at the Study’sfour railroad crossings at 14th, 17th, 33rd,and Adams Streets. The Amended DraftSingle Package eliminates the grade crossingsand introduces new structures to accommo-date grade-separated roadway traffic at therailroad tracks. These improvements willreduce traveler delays and safety.

Section 4(f): The Amended DraftSingle Package potentially encroaches uponfive Section 4(f) protected resources andupon three archeological sites. Therefore,there would be a Section 4(f) use of theresources. Meetings have been held withresponsible officials to discuss potentialSection 4(f) impacts and appropriate

mitigation. They agree there are no feasibleand prudent alternatives to avoid the remain-ing impacts, and every effort has been madeto minimize harm, and mitigate impacts.

Other: The other potential major envi-ronmental impact areas that are included inthe Draft Environmental Impact Statementare: demographics; land use; lighting; wet-lands; water quality; energy; wild and scenicrivers; coastal barriers; coastal zones; relation-ship between short-term uses of man’senvironment and the maintenance andenhancement of long-term productivity; anyirreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in theproposed action; and cumulative impacts. See the summary box to page 18.

Holmes Lake provides suburban flood control, a park and recreation opportunities.

A FinalThought

“On behalf of the three

Partners, we hope you have a

clearer vision of the Antelope

Valley picture,” said Mayor Don

Wesely. “After four years of study,

it is now time for the community

to review that picture,

ask questions and formulate its

collective preference. Then we

can turn the study into a set of

projects and start implementing

the first set of proposed storm-

water, transportation and com-

munity revitalization projects.”

“The vision is exciting,” the

Mayor added. “The price tag is

high, but it is affordable when

funded over a period of years,

with other levels of government

and the private sector contribu-

ting to the project costs. This

community can grow in a quality

manner and still keep taxes

affordable. We need to balance a

healthy, safe and prosperous city

core with a vibrant and expan-

ding community edge. In the

three Partner’s opinion, it is now

time to move forward and imple-

ment this visionary project.”

DEIS (continued from page 18)